"I have never welcomed the weakening of family ties by politics or pressure" - Nelson Mandela.
"He who travels for love finds a thousand miles no longer than one" - Japanese proverb.
"Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence." - Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
"When people's love is divided by law, it is the law that needs to change". -
David Cameron.

Saturday, 6 July 2013

BritCits bulletin 6th July 2013

This is the Sunday morning update that has been shared with our mailing list.  The BritCits bulletins are authored by Sonel, who tweets at https://twitter.com/BritCits

Good morning and happy sunny weekend to all, wherever in the world you are.

SURVEY
Request to please fill in this yourself, and share with others..for results to be more meaningful need as large a sample size as possible.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/VTT2LRT
9th July - HUGE DAY. See earlier email and email to come tomorrow.
Pack - will be updated this weekend. If you want your story and photo included please send it in today.


(Note from Steve : our collection of 'protest art', i.e. examples of flyers etc., is here : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/flyers . Use and modify as you wish!
 
More on the divided families day of action is here : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/divided-families-day-of-action.html . Be there!!! ).

HOUSE OF LORDS DEBATE
Family migration debate in the House of Lords was well attended by various campaign and ethnic groups and those affected by the rules personally, on 4th July.  There was overwhelming support for the rules to be amended in the interest of fairness..more below from my frantically written notes.

Baroness Hamwee started the debate further to the APPG on Migration report
She specified that the route for adult dependants was blocked and asked for the nature of the ONE visa granted under the new rules.  (I spoke with her and Lord Avebury after the debate and they feel that its likely no further adult dependant visas have been issue as the rules are impossible as they read them, AND the one visa issued is likely to have been an error or under the previous rules).
The message she has received from the govt is that the rules are working as intended.  She pushed for the inclusion of non-cash assets in the financial threshold and made a joke that holding high amounts of liquid cash (i.e. £62,500) is a sign of not handling assets very well, as well as allowing help from family.

Lord Parekh
Completely in against the new rules..I found him difficult to understand though, so recommend you read the Hansard for his words..essentially along the lines of the adult dependant rules are forcing us to outsource ensuring the well-being of our parents to third parties, and how skilled NHS staff being forced into exile...
 
Lord Teverson
Fab, booming voice. He provided lots of interesting stats to especially highlight that British citizens are also migrants in other countries..it’s not just UK receiving migrants:  5 million British citizens live abroad. Every year, 100,000 Brits migrate overseas for 1 year or longer; of these 90% are of working age, and 66% are single when they leave the UK..so its not unexpected if they fall in love when overseas.
He cited examples from his own extended family where people had done so and spoke about people he had personally met who were marriage exiles.. with british kids unable to have a british upbringing; british grandparents unable to nurture and spend time with their grandchildren,
 He quoted from the 2010 election manifesto that families were to be an important part of ALL govt policies..(so including immigration) and that this also in the coalition agreement.

 Lord Kilclooney (Northern Ireland)
 Spoke of migrants in NI, especially from Poland, Lithuanie and Portugal..how several years ago they didn’t have one visa applicant, and how times had changed (in a favourable way).
 He spoke of the delay in visa processing, that he was aware of an application made in February 2012, with the decision only received in May 2013.  Spoke of one case he knew, of an Australian working in a nursing home in NI, who had married a Brit there. The Brit had a family firm of which he was the 3rd generation, which employs 25 people. However even they had the visa denied by the Secretary of State, who said as the couple both speak English, there was nothing insurmountable in their moving to Australia.  (My thought here was, not welcome if you speak English, not welcome if you don’t!)

 Lord Judd
He said to allow doctors to be at their best, important to allow their family values to apply.. this was being denied to them by the current rules. He said it was important to include grandparents in the family as often this enabled mums to go to work..they ran the kids to and from school..
Spoke of the impact on kids not having been taken into account..and it was in fact, cynical neglect.
Britain was a pioneer on UN convention rights of the child and therefore it is right for children to be central to our considerations.

Lord Avebury
He said that the current immigration rules have weakened family community.  The prevention of legal aid is not for economic reasons (and bulls eye here) but just because of the net migration target.  Stellar quote: The current rules are 'Tories balmiest policy'.  He also asked for numbers on the adult dependant visas issued under the new rules, which until October 2012, was apparently just one.  (I spoke with Lord Avebury and Baroness Hamwee afterwards - their view is that no further adult dependant visas will have been issued; the govt being silent on the nature of the one visa issued is likely because it was a mistake or in fact, under the old rules..scandalous!)


Lord Taylor of Warwick
No blacks, no Irish, no dogs..was the message in the 1840s, he said (I was under the impression this was policy even later than that).  His dad grew up in Jamaica, and after moving to the UK, played cricket for Warwickshire. He was known as the Jamaican immigration...until he scored a century, after which the papers lauded him as the local Brummie hero.
His view on the APPG report is not that its an enquiry into minority groups, but more an enquiry into the Britain of the future. He said it is easier to bring up a strong child and repair a broken man.  He referred to the Home Office report, also dated 4/7/13, citing the negative impact from immigration.  (If anyone has seen this, views welcome.) 

Bear in mind, this is a guy who is a Conservative, he also went on to say, that removing immigration from NHS and the public service, would result in chaos...we need a society that comes together.  He supported David Cameron's view that Britain needs good not mass immigration but also went on to say that we should have good and fair immigration rules.. rules to be firm but also fair.


Lord Roberts of Llanduno
British hospitality is becoming British hostility.  "We are all immigrants".  Some further interesting stats from him: 13% of UK taxpayers claim benefits. 7% immigrants claim benefits. According to the British Medical Journal, more Brits seek medical advice overseas than vice versa, so when it comes to the NHS, there is clearly scaremongering going on.
Asylum seekers must survive on £35.63 per week. and they are not allowed to work...processing their application could be in the years rather than months, so its not easy for them to live on this amount.
Life in the UK test..more a pub quiz really, with questions in there that even the peers themselves havent been able to answer. Random questions like the height of London Eye..
All these are just making the door to entry narrower, with higher and higher barriers being erected.

Earl of Listowel
Message revolved around the welfare of kids. Financial requirements are so onerous that they're pushing women onto dependency on the State; often as single parents, they cant work full-time while also depriving kids of their father.
Research shows that the outcome of kids who grow up without their fathers is very poor...denying a child contact with both parents is not in their interest, affecting even the kid's confidence.

Lord Rosser
Immigrants have built and developed some of our biggest businesses. They have developed the health service, helped us win Nobel prizes.
The income requirement is splitting up families; even where the non-EEA spouse is a middle or high income earner, because the spouse's income does not count towards the qualification.
Commented on the revised rules for Armed Forces personnel, who now are not exempt from the migration rules..he noted this was in marked contrast to a decision on 3rd July to exempt the reserves when it came to things like employment tribunal.


Respondent: Lord Taylor of Holbeach
Lord Taylor of Holbeach for the most part provided the standard spiel of those wishing to live here to ensure its not at the expense of the taxpayer. In response to the number of adult dependant visas issued under the new rules, he claimed to not have the figure, but gave a larger figure reflecting the total number of visas issued – whether this was for spouses, family visits, etc..we don’t know..but very telling that he did not provide the adult dependants figure..and unsurprising he gave a higher figure in a very transparent attempt to mislead.
What was most remarkable though was in his response, he admitted there is a dichotomy between the current immigration rules and families forming the bedrock of society. The first time ever I am aware of, we have received this kind of admission from the government.


You can find a link to the Hansard for the full text, and Steve's overview, here: http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/lords-debate.html?spref=tw

- Sonel 





Sean & Mari

“I am keen for my small family to be near my parents, to gain recognition of our family as a legal unit and be around to look after my parents as they get older.”

Sean is a British citizen. He spent the first 19 years of his life in St Helen’s Merseyside, growing up on a council estate. When he was 18, by a stroke of luck, he came across the love of his life.

One night he commented on an Oasis music video, something he did often. This time however, his comment led to a discussion on music with Mari, in Chile. They spent the next year talking online, following which Sean managed to scrape together enough money to go visit her in Chile. It was a dream come true.

Sean arrived in Chile on 12th August 2009 when he was 19 and had finished college. He has been living there since - Mari needed to finish university and Sean was supportive of her wanting to pursue further education.

Sean and Mari married in January 2013. It was awful for Sean not having his family there – but they could not afford the journey. Sean lives with Mari’s family, for whom Sean is like a son. But living in Chile has not been easy.

They experienced an earthquake measuring 8.8 on the Richter scale when their life flashed before
them. And Sean knew home was where he wanted to be in the long-term. They agreed to move to the UK once Mari’s education was complete.

Sean is not rich nor does he pretend to be. He hasn’t been in UK since 2009 – hasn’t seen his family since then. As Mari has now finished university, Sean and Mari are working together to save money for their life together, hoping this will allow them a head start when they return to UK.

Sean has a dream. To see his family and have them meet his wife. He wants to have a small celebration in UK so his family can be part of his nuptials. He wants to spend time with his mum who recently had a heart attack.

But when Sean found out what the requirements are for a spouse visa, it’s like his heart stopped and he hasn’t stopped feeling helpless ever since. Research he carried out showed the new rules prevent 40% of the British working population from sponsoring a non-EEA spouse.

Sean feels as if the rules allow only the rich to fall in love...a working class Brit dare not make that
mistake. Most people in St Helen’s don’t earn anywhere near this amount.

All Sean wants is to come and live in UK with his wife; to be close to his mum. This young couple will work and pay their way. Sean does not think it’s right that he has to leave his wife for likely over 12 months it will take for him to find a job paying over £18,600, working in it for 6 months and then having UKBA process the spouse application. He can’t be apart from her that long.

When they married they promised each other to be together, to live together.

Sean has received some positive response from David Ward, MP for Bradford East, who has told him:
“It is cases such as yours which have encouraged me to challenge the income limit on spouse visas. I believe that these rules are unfair and that they prevent people in genuine marriages from being able to live happily with their partner. The limit effectively rules out large numbers of people (particularly in areas outside of London) from being able to afford to bring their partner into the UK. It effectively rules out people in certain professions from ever being able to bring their partners to the UK."

Support from this MP is the only thing giving Sean hope that he’ll return to his home one day.

Saturday morning catch-up

UK spouse immigration rules 'unjustified', High Court says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23198144

UK family immigration rules are not unlawful but are "onerous... and unjustified", the High Court has ruled.

Three claimants had challenged the new measures which set earnings thresholds for people wanting to sponsor the visas of their non-European spouses.

A judge said the court would not "strike down" the rules, but urged the home secretary to adjust them.

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
BBC online coverage on family migration court ruling has now been updated after we've put in a review request

UK spouse immigration rules ‘unjustified’ :
http://nehandaradio.com/2013/07/05/uk-spouse-immigration-rules-unjustified/
---

On Vaz vs. Harper ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23182670 ), https://twitter.com/BritCits says :
You tried @Keith_VazMP but pls reiterate point that migrants cant claim benefits;spouses income&assets should count
---

https://twitter.com/LabourLordsUK :
NEW at #LabourLordsblog: Richard Rosser on flaws in the design & application of the Govt’s new migration rules http://bit.ly/17VRoRG
(also : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/lords-debate.html , http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/more-on-lords-debate.html )
---

Tourists and students planning to visit the UK need not worry about their bank balances.

UK deputy high commissioner Peter Beckingham told TOI on Friday that no student or tourist from India will be asked to deposit Rs 2.7 lakh bond for entering UK. He said that the UK has not passed any such legislation and that the issue was misinterpreted and misreported.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/UK-wont-charge-bond-from-Indian-tourists-students/articleshow/20936675.cms

https://twitter.com/BritCits :
Only high risk individuals with criminal history/nothing to return home for, charged bond.Would they even get UK visa?

https://twitter.com/sjplep :
'Nothing to return home for' is the worrying bit... could prevent people coming on family visits?
---

Nigerians and Ghanaians to be charged £3k to enter Britain.

http://www.voice-online.co.uk/article/nigerians-and-ghanaians-be-charged-%C2%A33k-enter-britain

Plans to deter overstayers branded unfair and “discriminatory”.

Friday, 5 July 2013

Michael

Michael and his girlfriend met while students at Warwick University, and presents the important perspective of a young person - as we all know, many couples do meet and fall in love when they are young!

Michael also wrote the article Out of Sight, Out of Mind: The Heartlessness of the Home Secretary (link: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/michael-allen/out-of-sight-out-of-mind-_2_b_2228818.html ), an excellent piece which brings together the causes of British families divided by immigration rules, the plight of LMU students, and the cause of Roseline Akhalu (previously : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/the-trials-of-roseline-akhalu-httpwww.html ).

'I've been affected by two immigration rule changes: the abolition of the Tier 1 post-study work visa and the £18,600 salary limit, though I know the campaign is focused on the latter.

'My and my girlfriend's original plan was for her to stay in the UK on a post-study work visa (2 years). However, this was abolished just before she graduated (in 2012), which meant she had to return to Singapore. She did have a place on a Masters programme at Warwick, but unfortunately she didn't achieve the grades to get on it. I went over to Singapore for the summer of 2012, but had to return here for my final year of university. We have been apart for this whole year and I've only seen her for 2 weeks at Xmas. She is coming over in a few days to stay for 3 weeks (and attended the protest!), but after that she'll be gone again for probably between 6 months to 1 year. I may see her again this Xmas if I'm lucky, but my Masters is very expensive and she will be focusing on a law course in Singapore.

'We discussed getting married last year so that she would be able to stay in the UK. Obviously, we are quite young (I'm 21 and she's 22), so we didn't really want to get married, but thought it was the only option if we wanted to be together, as we did see a future together (which probably would entail marriage at some point). It turned out this option wouldn't work either, due to the £18,600 salary requirement. I could have applied to high-paying graduate jobs which would have covered this, but my dream had always been to become a journalist, which required one year of extra study and I didn't want to give up on that dream.

'In terms of how I've been affected, my final year at university was almost ruined by stress and depression. I was prescribed anti-anxiety medication. Fortunately I did get the grades I needed, but every day was an uphill struggle and my productivity was never at its best. As for my girlfriend, she had to have counselling in Singapore and her internship in a law firm suffered due to her being upset all the time.

The big news

High Court finds minimum income rules disproportionate and unjustified.

http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2013/07/05/high-court-finds-minimum-income-rules-disproportionate-and-unjustified/

Previously :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/important-decision-coming.html

Almost exactly a year after they were first introduced, Mr Justice Blake sitting in the High Court has in a lengthy, complex and very carefully considered judgment found that the controversial immigration rules requiring a minimum income of at least £18,600 for spouse visa applications are ‘unjustified and disproportionate’ where the sponsor is a refugee or a British citizen.
...

Blake J observes that British citizens have ‘a fundamental right of constitutional significance recognised by the common law’ to live in their home country but that for many applicants (estimated at around half the British population, in fact) if they wish to marry and live with a foreigner the rules require them to leave their own country. The consequences of this are considered by the Court to be so excessive in impact as to be beyond a reasonable means of giving effect to the legitimate aim behind the new rules.

Similarly, recognised refugees have not ‘chosen’ to live in the UK and make it their country of residence. They have been forced to leave their own country. To force a refugee to make a choice between marrying their partner of choice or leaving their country of refuge is simply unreasonable.
...

The judgment will come as a huge relief to the thousands of British and refugee families separated by these severe rules. It may even come as a relief to the Government, given the growing chorus of criticism in local and national media: what a result, to be able to look tough on immigration, blame the judges, escape the consequences of the policy and avoid the embarrassment of a climbdown.

Interestingly, there has been no knee-jerk condemnation of the judgment and the Home Office state they are pausing consideration of affected cases. This holds out at least a little hope that the Home Office will not actually appeal this one.
---

Whatever happens - let's keep fighting, keep united, and not be bought off. Remember those who won't benefit from any concessions that may be coming - remember the five years to ILR, the language requirement, the elderly dependants, the Brits locked into exile, the migrant comminities to whom this is yet another blow, and the way those affected have been treated and dismissed so far. 

The combined efforts of all of us have achieved a lot in just a year - including those whose stories are on this blog who contributed evidence to this particular case.

Keep campaigning.


---

High Court deals another blow to the Home Secretary’s rules on family migration and the minimum income threshold.

http://www.no5.com/news-and-publications/news/546-high-court-deals-another-blow-to-the-home-secretary-s-rules-on-family-migration-and-the-minimum-income-threshold/

Although the court did not strike down the rules as such, its declaratory judgment is a green light to foreign spouses who previously thought they had no prospect of being allowed to live together with their spouses in the UK to apply for permission to enter. After this judgment, many are likely to succeed in being allowed to enter under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights even though they cannot satisfy the harsh requirements of the rules especially if, for example, the UK sponsoring spouse earns above the national minimum wage, there is reliable ‘third party support’, there is reliable evidence that the foreign spouse or partner will be working in the UK, or where children are likely to be affected so that is not in their best interests for the foreign spouse to be refused entry.
---

Today, 5 July 2013, the High Court handed down its judgment in a Judicial Review of the minimum income threshold for spouses/partners and children applying in the family route.

The Home Office has paused decision-making on some spouse/partner and child settlement visa and leave to remain applications to enable us to consider the implications of the judgment.

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2013/july/16-judgement
---

High Court finds family immigration rules are not unlawful but the earnings threshold amounts to a disproportionate interference with family life.

http://www.ein.org.uk/news/high-court-finds-family-immigration-rules-are-not-unlawful-earnings-threshold-could-amount-disp

No5 Chambers continued in its press release: "Although the court did not strike down the rules as such, its declaratory judgment is a green light to foreign spouses who previously thought they had no prospect of being allowed to live together with their spouses in the UK to apply for permission to enter. After this judgment, many are likely to succeed in being allowed to enter under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights even though they cannot satisfy the harsh requirements of the rules especially if, for example, the UK sponsoring spouse earns above the national minimum wage, there is reliable ‘third party support’, there is reliable evidence that the foreign spouse or partner will be working in the UK, or where children are likely to be affected so that is not in their best interests for the foreign spouse to be refused entry. "

The Home Office has now announced that it has paused decision-making on some spouse/partner and child settlement visa and leave to remain applications to enable it to consider the implications of the judgment.
---

The full decision :
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/1900.html
---

https://twitter.com/BaileyYamamoto :
Victory! What a relief! Hopefully we can all be at home with our families soon :)
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsfragments/87-min-income-threshold
---

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1 :
Ok, in fact the spouse visa case is a huge victory for the claimants, court finds new rules disproportionate for Brits and refugees
---

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1 :
BBC report on immigration judgment today is wrong, actually held rules DO breach human rights, see http://wp.me/p1Zj2l-2k0
---

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo77 :
Home Office decision making paused following Blake's judgment, could mean they do not appeal?
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsfragments/87-min-income-threshold
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
For a better (more accurate) coverage than @BBCNews on the Family Migration judgement see @No5chambers analysis
http://www.no5.com/news-and-publications/news/546-high-court-deals-another-blow-to-the-home-secretary-s-rules-on-family-migration-and-the-minimum-income-threshold/

More on the Lords debate

For the quick summary, see : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/lords-debate.html

https://twitter.com/LibDemLords :
New on the Lib Dem Lords blog: Baroness Hamwee - Family migration rules have provoked outrage, puzzlement and anguish http://libdemlords.org.uk

'I got 10 minutes yestderday to urge the Government to review the rule on family migration introduced a year ago next week.  I could have filled 10 hours with the experiences I have heard – I don’t like to call them case studies as if people’s stories are of only academic interest.

'The themes of the new rules were to stop abuse, promote integration and reduce any burden on the taxpayer.  Stopping abuse (sham marriages) – does that mean separating a couple who have been together for 12 years, but only she and their British-born daughter can come to the UK, and he and their foreign born son cannot?

'Promoting integration – how they do so is beyond me.  And reducing the burden on the taxpayer – an attractive proposition, if it didn’t mean single parents looking to the state for support which would not be needed if both parents were together to look after the children.  In fact, an academic study, using government figures, suggests that the rules will cost the UK £850m over 10 years in lost economic activity.

'A British sponsor of a non-EEA spouse or partner has to show an income of £18,600 (a level that getting on for half UK wage-earners could not meet), and more if there is a child.  It is now in effect impossible to bring in elderly dependents.

'The separation of children from a parent is particularly worrying.  Early years are crucial developmentally as well as in terms of well-being.  The Children’s Commissioners of the four UK nations have supported the call for a review made by the all-party inquiry which I chaired.  And only this week, in another part of the legislative forest, we were discussing a clause in a government bill that the court is to presume that the involvement of a parent in the life of a child will further the child’s welfare.

'The detail of the rules is worse than confusing, and the forms and evidence required are problematic.  Not much other than straight salary counts, so it’s difficult if the non-Brit is the main earner, or if the Brit is self-employed with a fluctuating income.  Savings can be counted in lieu – up to £62,500 may be needed – but only cash held for a period (it strikes me that anyone holding a lot of liquid cash is likely not to be handling his assets well).  Third-party support doesn’t count, which is felt particularly acutely by grandparents who would like to be part of their grandchildren’s lives.

'And yet, and yet… if you are able to live and work in another part of the EU with your non-EEA spouse/partner, after a few months you can both come into the UK, settle and work here.

'No surprise that the rules have provoked outrage, puzzlement and anguish.  British citizens and taxpayers not able to live with their families in their own country.  Of course the sense of unfairness is so evident.
---

https://twitter.com/BaileyYamamoto :
Some very powerful speeches yesterday in the House of Lords from 3:41. Thank you!
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/130704-0002.htm#13070446000145
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
Labour peers put out a statement on family migration following yesterday's debate in House of Lords http://www.labourlords.org.uk/family-matters

'Immigrants have benefited Britain over a great many years. They have come to our shores to help build and develop some of our major companies, sustain our National Health Service and win Nobel Prizes.

'It is because immigration is important that it needs to be controlled and its impact must be fair for all. We need to build common bonds including more emphasis on speaking English. We also need much stronger action to tackle the exploitation of migrant workers that also undercuts local workers. That means stronger National Minimum Wage regulations, more enforcement and higher fines, and a register to tackle rogue landlords.

'We need to recognise the different kinds of immigration – the type that works for Britain and the type that does not. This is why Labour supports policies to bring down the pace of migration, stronger controls on those coming to do low-skilled jobs, and action against bogus colleges. It is also why we would do more to cut illegal immigration and more to help universities recruit international students who contribute to our economy.

'Some changes made by the Coalition to immigration rules are however, having unfortunate consequences.

'In July last year major changes to family related immigration categories came into effect. With limited exemptions, British citizens or settled persons wishing to sponsor their non-EEA national spouse or partner to join them must now demonstrate a minimum gross annual income of £18,600 - and more if they are also sponsoring dependent children. New foreign spouses or partners must also wait for five years (rather than the previous two) before they are eligible to apply for permanent settlement in the UK. More restrictive criteria has also been introduced for adult dependent relatives of British citizens who wish to settle here.

'At the time we expressed our support for strengthening the family migration rules to protect UK taxpayers, and said that if people want to make this country their home they should not be a burden on public funds. But we also cast doubt on the government’s approach, focusing on the sponsor’s salary, and called for a fair framework for those who fall in love and build family relationships across borders.

'A report by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Migration on the new rules has just been published. Its key findings are that some British citizens and permanent residents in the UK, including those in full-time employment, have been separated – in a number of cases permanently – from a non-EEA partner, and also their children, as a result of the income requirement. Indeed, with some families where the non-EEA partner was the main earner with a medium or high salary, this was disregarded under the new rules.

'It looks as though the doubts we raised have unfortunately been proved right. Among the APPG’s recommendations is a review of the level of the income requirement – to minimize any particular impacts on UK sponsors as a result of ethnicity, gender, age or indeed region of origin. They also recommend that migration rules should ensure children are supported to live with their parents where their best interests require this.'

'The government’s response remains to be seen. But as it stands, the new rules and their application are doing little to strengthen and enhance family life.'



Comedy gold

Capita says 8,000 potential illegal visa 'overstayers' have left UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23187320

More than 8,000 people previously thought to have illegally overstayed their visa have, in fact, left the UK, Capita has revealed.

In September 2012 the UK Border Agency awarded the services company a contract worth up to £40m to find more than 150,000 missing people.

By the end of March, Capita told UKBA 8,328 of them had left the UK and it had managed to contact a further 5,250.

The government said it was "pleased" with progress made so far.

No doubt one of these is my ex-lodger - previously (comedy gold) :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/through-post-following-missive-arrived.html
---

Immigration salary debate : Mark Harper vs Keith Vaz.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23182670

... Higher than the salary of serving soldiers ( http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/via-email-armed-forces.html )
... And higher than the average salary in Leicester.



Wrestling with the angel.
 
---

Immigration husband’s battle.

http://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/local/immigration-husband-s-battle-1-5250218

A cabbie who claims he cannot safely earn the £18,600 needed to bring his wife to the UK from Pakistan is heading to Westminster for talks next week.

Last week we reported on Shelley Hornby-Baaouani, who is fighting to bring her husband to the UK to join her and their three month old son Rayan

And this week Mohammed Malik, who is in a similar situation came forward to claim that the financial requirement for couples is far too high and that he is prepared to fight for a change in the rules.

He said: “All I want is for my wife to come here and live with me. We don’t want any benefits.”
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
@MumsnetTowers gets involved in the debate on Family Migration rules
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/bloggers/1793557-Guest-blog-government-policy-is-dividing-families?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=tweet&utm_campaign=immigration

More : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/mumsnet

Via email - armed forces

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-immigration-rules-for-armed-forces-families-announced

Quote:

There will be more flexibility and the rules will take into account the realities of life in the Armed Forces ...ensuring family members are able to integrate into British society and are supported by their sponsor

Scary to see how the official PR machine is continuing

Also interesting to compare to http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.htm
where the first few levels of both NCOs (up to middle ranks 2nd Lt.) and "normal recruits" will not be permitted to marry foreigners.


I have to say, using weasel words such as 'flexibility', 'insuring integration' and , astonishingly, the title 'New rules have been announced to ensure Armed Forces personnel are not disadvantaged by immigration rules and family members can integrate into society.' - to refer to something which disadvantages people who may not be able to bring their families in - I'm almost speechless. Frankly, this is among the most egregious examples of doublespeak which I think I've seen in my life. I'm amazed (which takes some doing).

It's only when you get onto the bit about 'Aligning Armed Forces families to Family Migration Policy' that one may smell a rat....


More :

Armed forces to face family visa restrictions.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23179439

British soldiers with partners or children from outside the European Union are to face the same visa restrictions as other families.

Servicemen and women will have to reach a minimum income threshold in order to sponsor a non-EU spouse's visa.

The rules, which have applied to most families since 2012, will come into force from 1 December.

From http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.htm :

The following are affected by the £18,600 requirement, the income required to bring in a partner :
 Officers
          2nd Lt Gap Year Level 2                 £17,441
           Officer Cadet   Level 1                      £15,981
Ranks
         Private          Level 1                £17,689
         Private          Level 2                £18,165 (min. earnings)
         All University Cadet Entrants            £18,149 (max. earnings)

The following are affected by the £22,400 requirement, the income required to bring in a partner and one child :
Officers
         2nd Lt Gap Year Level 3        £19,009
Ranks
        Private Level 3            £18,641 (min.)
        Private Level 4            £20,229 (min.)
        Lance Cpl Level 5        £21,292 (min.)
        Lance Cpl Level 6        £21,656 (min.)

The following are affected by the £24,800 requirement, the income required to bring in a partner and two children :
 All Ranks below Corporal
        Lance Cpl Level 7    £22,582 (min.)
        Lance Cpl Level 8    £23,616 (min.)
        Lance Cpl Level 9    £24,472 (min.)



Postscript : Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Doublespeak may take the form of euphemisms (e.g., "downsizing" for layoffs, "servicing the target" for bombing [1]), in which case it is primarily meant to make the truth sound more palatable. It may also refer to intentional ambiguity in language or to actual inversions of meaning (for example, naming a state of war "peace"). In such cases, doublespeak disguises the nature of the truth. Doublespeak is most closely associated with political language. (source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak )

Lords debate

An excellent, and very welcome, debate, in the House of Lords this afternoon. I may write more on this at a future date but for now, a quick summary.

There were 11 speakers -
Labour : Lord Rosser (spokesman), Lord Parekh, Lord Judd.
Lib Dems : Baroness Hamwee, Lord Teverson, Lord Avebury, Lord Roberts of Llandudno.
Conservatives : Lord Taylor of Holbeach (spokesman), Lord Taylor of Warwick.
Crossbenchers : Lord Kilclooney, Lord Listowel.

Some of these names will be familiar to long-term readers - in particular Lord Judd (who chaired the 9th July parliamentary meeting last year), Baroness Hamwee (the lead on the APPG report), Lord Teverson and Lord Avebury have been very active.
Lord Taylor of Warwick provided a welcome Conservative voice calling for a review of the rules.

Of the speakers, all but one (Lord Taylor of Holbeach, the government spokesman) spoke against the rules as they stand. I sense a distinct sea change here, and it was notable that many more peers were engaged compared with the previous motion to regret back in October. This campaign will grow and grow. Frankly it's been clear for a long time that the rules are untenable as they stand, but let's keep pushing hard.

The Hansard is here for review :
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/130704-0002.htm#13070446000145
(updated link 5/July/2013)
(a copy of the Hansard has also been mirrored here : http://www.scribd.com/doc/151956054/Hansard-04-July-2013 )

Baroness Hamwee :
A study by Middlesex University suggests that preventing up to 17,800 migrant partners—the Government’s estimate—from coming and working here will cost the UK as much as £850 million over 10 years in lost economic activity.

Lord Parekh :
My first concern is therefore simply this, and I really want to emphasise it: not allowing one to bring in parents and grandparents as long as there is someone else to look after them is simply morally unacceptable. It is also unworthy of a civilised society.

Lord Teverson :
I went to Buenos Aires over Christmas and the new year, because two members of my extended family had got married and had a son, who now has Argentinian as well as British citizenship. They invited us out there, and we met another British citizen who had married a Brazilian woman. Now they as a family can no longer come back to the United Kingdom.

Lord Judd :
I am really very disturbed that we are speaking with forked tongues on the issue of family. We keep emphasising the importance of family in our own society, but it does not apply to people who have been allowed through the immigration system to come and join us and make a contribution to our society. Either the family matters or it does not.

Lord Avebury :
... the Government have divided husbands from wives, parents from children, and elderly dependants from those who want to look after them in their final years. They have weakened family unity and made it harder for migrants to contribute their full potential to our society. They are violating the right to family life and will face challenges, I hope, in the courts.

Lord Taylor of Warwick :
The rules are such that children, including British children and babies, are being separated from their families. We know that the formative years of any child’s life are the most crucial. It is easier to build a strong child than to repair a broken man.

Lord Roberts of Llandudno :
I fear that the old British hospitality is becoming British hostility—that is how it looks to those overseas.

Lord Listowel :
I have several questions for the Minister. In formulating these regulations, was consideration given to the impact that they would have on children, particularly on those boys thus denied contact with their fathers? Can he say how many boys are unable to have regular contact with their fathers as a result of these rules? If not, can he say how many children are affected?

Lord Kilclooney :
I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and her colleagues on the good work of their group, because it is a thorough, detailed and excellent report and certainly enhances the good name of all-party parliamentary groups.

(Odd fact : three of the contributors to the debate have the given name 'John Taylor').

Thursday, 4 July 2013

Link roundup

Family migration routes to the UK – with a stop-over in Europe.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6557c39d-e2c5-46b9-ac10-82e5b773f031

 One has to restrain the urge, in response to these ‘findings’, to say, ‘well what did the Government expect?’. The family migration rules of July 2012 were badly drafted, difficult to understand and in no way rooted in reality. They operate in a world where the British/settled spouse is always the breadwinner; family members never provide reliable financial assistance; and only couples with £62,500 in the bank can financially support themselves from their savings.

The APPG has made a number of recommendations aimed at tackling some of the more distressing findings, including an independent review of the minimum income requirement. It has also recommended that this income requirement be reviewed to account for any discriminatory impact and that decision-makers fully discharge their duty to consider the best interests of any relevant children when deciding applications.
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
Have you signed our petition on #FamilyMigration yet? We are taking it to Downing St on 9th July
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/support-the-right-to-family-life
---

Haywards Heath children beg Government not to deport their daddy.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10524428.Haywards_Heath_children_beg_Government_not_to_deport_their_daddy/

Three children are begging the Home Office not to deport their dad.

Australian Phil Sommerville has been told he will be sent home - despite his British wife of 12 years and their three children living in the UK.

The saga centres around a letter the Government body claims to have sent in March - but the family say they never received - asking for more information to support Phil's visa application about his relationship and the family's home.

The first the family knew was when the 46-year-old was threatened with deportation in April.

https://twitter.com/JCWInews :
This kind of persecution is funded by the taxpayer - and they want to cut legal aid?
---

Armed forces to face family visa restrictions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23179439

British soldiers with partners or children from outside the European Union are to face the same visa restrictions as other families.

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

New flyer - 9/7



The rest of the collection : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/new-flyers.html

Be there !!! : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/divided-families-day-of-action.html

Important decision coming

RBM Solicitors :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/RBM-Solicitors/218381134574?fref=ts

At 10:00am on Friday 5th July 2013 the High Court (Mr Justice Blake) will give judgement in the eagerly awaited test case of MM and Others –v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Between 5th and 8th February 2013 the High Court heard the judicial reviews of three claimants who challenged the drastic changes to Immigration Rules which came into force on 9th July 2012

RBM Solicitors acted for the child in the case.

The amended rules require British persons and Refugees to demonstrate a minimum annual income of £18,600 before they are able to sponsor non-EEA spouses from coming to or remaining in the United Kingdom.

The decision is a huge national and international public importance and will affect and impact lives of many British Citizens who have been affected by the draconian changes to the Immigration Rules.

If the Court rules in favour of the claimants then it will seen as a further blow to the flawed policies of Theresa May in trying to curtail fundamental Article 8 rights.

On 10th June 2013 the All-Party Parliamentary Group published its report on the effect of the new rules:

http://www.appgmigration.org.uk/sites/default/files/APPG_family_migration_inquiry_report-Jun-2013.pdf
---

New immigration rules attacked at public meeting in Hackney.

http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/new_immigration_rules_attacked_at_public_meeting_in_hackney_1_2261597

A public meeting was held last Wednesday to support the Divided Families campaign, which wants to repeal rules making it harder for British citizens and people settled here to bring in non-British partners.

A year ago rules were changed meaning you need to earn at least £18,600 annually to bring a husband, wife, civil partner or fiancé into Britain, or more to cover any children or elderly dependents who may wish to enter.

At the meeting organised by the Hackney Refugee and Migrant Support Group Dalston CLR James library, Steve Green from BritCits, an organisation defending the rights of international families, said: “The rules were brought in without debate in Parliament. They are an attack on the nature of British citizenship.”

Previously :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/hackney-migrant-centre-late-home.html
---

Family life is a right not a privilege.

https://www.facebook.com/FamilyLifeIsARightNotAPrivilege

My family and many others are being kept apart because of the ukba! we are not being giving the basic rights of human life.
---

https://twitter.com/JCWInews :
£1k charge 4new migrants makes life even more difficult 4families divided by family restrictions. protest Tuesday
http://www.jcwi.org.uk/blog/2013/06/24/streets-come-westminster
---

https://twitter.com/ncadc :
New blogpost: NHS consultation on charging migrants: make sure you have your say http://bit.ly/14Ng4pG
---

https://twitter.com/MigRightsScot :
Documenting the plight of divided families:
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/new-flyers.html?spref=tw
Support the Campaign against #familyimmigrationrules this 9/7!

https://twitter.com/Michael_K_Allen :
Loving the new flyers from @BritCits for the July 9th Family Migration protest
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/new-flyers.html?spref=tw
---

https://twitter.com/BritCits :
Both founders of BritCits will be at Lords debate Thurs 4th July,discussing family immigration.Public welcome in gallery. Will you be there?
---

https://twitter.com/BritCits :
Sick to death of uninformed arguments about those who can't claim benefits. Glad this person is setting things clear pic.twitter.com/F434pksAx3
---

https://twitter.com/BritCits :
PM misses wife after few days apart.Spare thought for thousands of couples he has kept apart for months,some years!
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/411610/Missing-her-desperately-PM-opens-up-on-Sam-Cam-and-his-dream-to-be-Harry-Potter

https://twitter.com/The_FIA :
"I haven't seen my wife for several days now and I miss her desperately." Has @David_Cameron ever tried for a spousal visa? #dividedfamilies
---

https://twitter.com/Michael_K_Allen :
Disappointed with response from @ChloeSmithMP RE my email about Divided Families Campaign @BritCits @The_FIA pic.twitter.com/SN4z8EoteU

https://twitter.com/The_FIA :
@Michael_K_Allen @BritCits What does @ChloeSmithMP think about excluding spouses' assets & earnings? No 'serious evidence-based work' there!

https://twitter.com/hey_preston :
£18,600 lmit where COUPLE receive no benefits so why earnings of spouse ignored?
---

https://twitter.com/MigrantTales :
Finland was, is, and never will be only "white" http://wp.me/p2rIYQ-5Bf
---

https://twitter.com/steveplrose :
AP does not use the term "illegal immigrant" any more. "Illegal" should only describe an action not a person. Shame on .@ukhomeoffice
---

Is Edward Snowden a refugee?

http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2013/07/02/is-edward-snowden-a-refugee/

More on Mumsnet

https://twitter.com/MumsnetBloggers :
"This unjust immigration policy is dividing families and damaging children" - today's guest blog from @The_FIA http://bit.ly/13j2LSc

From the comments on the article :
'Thank you so much for highlighting this MN it is a subject that is very close to my heart.

'DH is currently appealing his right to remain in the country so he can be a father to our 4 DCs. We are married and I am a trainee social worker so obviously don't earn anything as it is all NHS bursaries.

'In order for DH to be allowed in this country as my husband I have to be earning £29600, even when I have qualified I am not going to be earning anything near this. Even if I was, DH would have to leave the country and return to Zimbabwe to apply to return as my spouse as you are not able to do this from within the UK hmm This can take months and months and months.

'So, if DH's appeal fails and he is removed from the country (which is a very real threat we live with every day) he would never be able to return. The children would be left without a father and I would have to stop training and start claiming every benefit available. shock sad

'We would have to consider moving as a family to another European country, remaining there for 3 years and then we would be able to come home and live here together without a problem as DH would be considered ordinarily resident in an EU country!! hmm

'Our paperwork went in 6 months ago, we have heard nothing from them.

'DH has lived in this country for 11 years, has 4 children aged 8, 7, 6 and 9 weeks. He has worked full time and paid taxes, never been in any kind of trouble and he has been an excellent stay at home Dad whilst I have been studying.

'This is only touching the surface of the hell we are being put through because of the changes the coalition have/are making. How anyone can support this kind of madness is beyond me, how can anyone think it is ok to treat people this way! angry

Previously :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/mumsnet.html

Lizzie & Alexander

Lizzie & Alexander

“I’m angry, hurt and upset. I meet the financial requirements yet they rejected my husband’s application..this is clearly discrimination against women.”

Lizzie is a British citizen. Her husband Alexander, is a doctor from Ecuador. They have been living together for four and a half years in Chile, married for two of these years.

They married in June 2011 in UK, in Lizzie’s local church, before returning to Chile where Lizzie worked as a financial consultant and Alexander eventually as a consulting doctor. Their daughter was born in February 2012 following which they decided to relocate to UK to be close to Lizzie’s family and ensure their daughter benefited from a British education.



They submitted Alexander’s application in November 2012 and then…nothing. No emails, no calls, no news. In February 2013, Lizzie and her daughter returned to the UK expecting Alexander would follow not long after. However, in March 2013, Lizzie complained about the delay to WorldBridge. The response received further to the complaint was a refusal.

The couple has been apart for several months already. Father and daughter have been apart for the same length of time. The family is missing out on sharing precious moments..precious ‘first’ moments. Stolen moments that will never return.

What makes the situation worse is that Lizzie’s income in Chile combined with her cash savings in the UK, this family actually meets UKBA’s financial requirement. Yet UKBA was able to manufacture a reason to refuse the couple, stating Lizzie had not continued employment for the six month period prior to the application since her income was from maternity payments i.e. that maternity pay was not evidence of continuous employment. This is despite Lizzie having sent a certificate signed by her employer in Chile stating her continued employment.

UKBA said Lizzie had not shown evidence of her savings. This despite her having submitted bank statements, although she admits they were a few months older – an ISA which only sends out statements on an annual basis and premium bond statements which were first sent to Lizzie’s parents' home and then sent across to Chile. But the money was there and she did the best she could to obtain evidence of her UK savings UK from Chile, while also juggling recent motherhood.

Lizzie is furious that rules which clearly discriminate against women are in place…rules which systematically penalise women, for having kids, for adopting the traditional role of homemaker, for sacrificing their career to care for their family...for being women who historically and statistically are paid less than men.

Legal advice obtained has indicated that Alexander will not even qualify for a visitor’s visa now as he has displayed an intent to live in the UK. So the only way for this family to see each other again is for Lizzie to travel to Ecuador, on a 15+ hour flight with one year old. She cannot remain there as she is employed in the UK – she wants to ensure she does not jeopardise her income levels here lest she lose her appeal. So she is juggling childcare and employment.

Yet Lizzie believes the real victim of these unfair rules – rules which should be illegal – is her daughter. The Geneva Convention was created to protect families from exactly this sort of abuse. Her daughter only sees her daddy through Skype for an hour each day and her mother is constantly stressed, tired and struggling.

This is not how their little family was. They were so happy.

Lizzie never thought this would happen to her. She never dreamed a British system could get things so badly wrong. Her faith in British democracy and justice has been misplaced; her family torn apart just so politicians can say they’re being "tough on immigration" whatever the cost. She is upset that families of British citizens are being used as scapegoats for a bemusing political agenda. She’s hurt that her country has let her down. She is angry that there is no one who is going to be held accountable for the misery caused.

With a further 3-9 months separation Lizzie is having difficulty focusing on the light at the end of the tunnel. She is desperate for the rules to change – to change now, not after the next election.

Tuesday, 2 July 2013

Keep signing...

Petition going to Downing Street on 9th July

http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/support-the-right-to-family-life

Keep signing and sharing!

Previously : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/petition-going-to-downing-street-via.html

New flyers

Be there!!!








Mumsnet

Mumsnet: government policy is dividing families

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/bloggers/a1793557-Guest-blog-government-policy-is-dividing-families

By Chris Mead, friend and colleague of our sister campaign, the Family Immigration Alliance -
http://familyimmigrationalliance.wordpress.com/

We work shoulder-to-shoulder with the FIA. In my case, the FIA's mention in the Economist article 'Sons and lovers' ( http://www.economist.com/node/21556926 ), which was published around the time of the introduction of harsh new family division rules ( http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/introduction.html ) - led directly to me seeking Chris out and from then those early, key connections which brought me into the campaign.


In a recent change to immigration law, a British citizen must earn above a certain threshold before their foreign partner is allowed to live in the UK.

In this guest blog, Chris Mead of the Family Immigration Alliance explains why the organization is fighting to change the law.

"On the 9th July families with foreign spouses will be marking 'Divided Families Day'.

A year ago, the government introduced new requirements on British 'sponsors' (that is, the British resident in a relationship) to earn at least £18600 to have their foreign spouse join them in the UK. This increases by £22400 if the couple has a child, and another £2400 for each child after that.

To put this into context, 40% of the UK population earn less than £18600. And to make matters worse, neither the couple's parents, nor the foreign spouse, are allowed to contribute towards meeting this amount. The burden is entirely on the British sponsor.

Recently a group of MPs released a report on this issue, exposing the full severity of the rules. Evidence they received from Coram Children's Legal Advice Centre told of a mother, separated from 'her husband and two sons, aged just five months and 18 months, all British citizens. The separation means that the mother has had to stop breastfeeding her five-month-old baby.' There is growing evidence that this sort of separation is having a significant impact on the development of children.

Carol, a British citizen from Southampton is married to Ahmed, from Iran. They met at university and have a daughter. But Ahmed's application to stay in the UK was refused because Carol didn't earn enough to meet the threshold. She was 3 months pregnant when Ahmed had to return to Iran. Carol works for a law firm, but still does not earn enough to sponsor Ahmed's application. Their daughter is almost 1 now, and has still never seen her father.

Ahmed is also working and Carol's parents have even offered to contribute money to sponsor the application. The rules do not allow this though, leaving the burden solely on Carol to prove she can earn enough by herself, to have Ahmed live with her. Her story features in a video explaining the injustice of the new rules.

Research from Oxford University suggests that 47% of the working adult population of the UK would not be able to meet these requirements if they needed to. Worse still, the rules threaten to cost the tax payer more, by preventing foreign spouses from supporting their families - pushing some sponsors onto welfare benefits.

Emma's husband is Indonesian. She is a professional graphic designer with over 15 years of work experience. 'Due to childcare commitments, I couldn't secure full time work, and I couldn't afford child care costs even if I did find a full time position.

I have been on Income Support, and now going onto Job Seekers Allowance - [it's] so ironic, because if my husband was allowed to be in this country, our child care problems would cease to exist, and we could both have the shared time to work and care for our family without having to claim any benefit from the state.'

Because of the illogical rules for assessing whether sponsors can meet this income threshold, thousands of British families are being indefinitely separated. Could you face forced separation from your spouse or children because of rules like this?

If not, please do think about acting right now to help families like Carol's and Emma's. A coalition of groups called the Divided Families Campaign is holding a Day of Action on the 9th July to call on Theresa May to end the suffering her rules have caused.

* The Migrants Rights Network will be presenting its petition to 10 Downing Street. Add your name to the list of signatories calling on Theresa May to overturn these rules.

* Better still, let your MP know about the impact of the rules and invite them to attend Divided Families Day in parliament. (Sample letter : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/lobby-your-mp-sample-letter-below.html )

* Or, if you're nearby, why not join us outside the Home Office on the 9th July, at 4pm.

If you'd like to read more about the impact these rules are having on families, take a look at BritCits, Family Immigration Alliance, JCWI and MRN."


Mum continues fight to allow husband UK entry

Mum continues fight to allow husband UK entry

http://www.braintreeandwithamtimes.co.uk/news/10509926.Braintree__Mum_continues_fight_to_allow_husband_UK_entry/

 A mum who was told she must earn at least £18,600 before her Moroccan husband can move to England is refusing to give up the fight.

Jade el Jaghaoui fell in love with Merouane in 2007 when they were living in Spain.

She returned to Braintree in October 2010, hoping he could soon join her, and became even more desperate after discovering she was pregnant.

But immigration rules mean British citizens must earn £18,600 to bring a non-European spouse to join them.

Mr el Jaghaoui even missed the birth of son Sami in September 2011 after a hold-up with a six-month visa application.

BritCit Jade tells her story :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/jade-young-mum-claims-it-is-one-rule.html


Today's links


British-Syrian family separated by UK immigration rules.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23141406

British-Syrian national Jenan Gabbar escaped the civil war in Syria with her children and moved to Leicester to start a new life.

But new immigration rules in the UK mean her husband cannot get a visa to visit them.

The rules have been criticised by the Children's Commissioner, who says children are being separated from their parents.

https://twitter.com/JonAshworth :
This morning my British-Syrian constituent Jenan Gabbar featured on @BBCBreakfast re the rigid family migration rules
---

https://twitter.com/MigrantChildren :
BBC Radio 4 - World at One, 02/07/2013, Sarah Teather: "I just forsee an enormous amount of misery" http://bbc.in/12iT3ss  - We agree.
---

https://twitter.com/APPGMigration :
Our second debate on family migration is this Thursday, 4th July, at 4pm, in the @UKHouseofLords led by Baroness Hamwee.

Monday, 1 July 2013

Shanika

Shanika

“I earn over £100,000 - enough to look after my ageing & ill mum without recourse to public funds. Yet I’m told she doesn’t qualify. So who does?”

Shanika is a British citizen and earns well over £100,000. She doesn’t normally show off her income levels. But it’s necessary to point out that she is capable of supporting her mother in the UK; provide the care, attention and love her mother needs, without recourse to public funds. Something she is being told she is not allowed to do.

Shanika’s mother is 68, living in Sri Lanka. Shanika has dutifully visited her, helping her receive medical attention for her worsening memory loss. Unfortunately, mental health issues are underdiagnosed in Sri Lanka, as they often are in developing countries...things that we take for granted the diagnosis of, are usually put down simply to old age, without any further therapy, treatment or care.

Shanika however knew this wasn’t normal. She persisted and found a doctor who was willing to conduct a detailed testing. And they discovered that Shanika’s mother is likely due to Alzheimer’s disease, compounded by depression and a silent stroke, confirmed by an MRI scan.

Her mother also has a history of high sugar & cholesterol - having had one stroke, she’s at a higher risk of another. However, her memory loss means she often forgets to take her medication, increasing the risk of heart failure, increasing the risk of another stroke. She cannot be left alone. She cannot cook as she often forgets that the stove is on. The doctor has recommended she not drive either, as even familiar roads are forgotten.

Other cognitive functions are fine, but are expected to deteriorate.

Shanika’s mother does not live alone. She is not a single parent, nor is she a widow. She lives with her husband. But a husband who is verbally abusive and unsympathetic of her medical conditions or needs. The situation has been escalating over the last 10 years; with both the parents residing in different rooms of a house…somehow feeling lucky if they have managed to avoid each other all day. This isn’t easy for Shanika to admit…to share with BritCits, our members and our readers. It isn’t easy for her to admit that her parents are only together because of cultural and social stigmas preventing them from seeking a divorce. It’s no doubt difficult for any child to face, however much of an ‘adult’ you become.

However Shanika is facing it. She is an only child and while she calls her mother on a daily basis, she knows she is alone. She is lonely. She needs Shanika in the same way Shanika needed her years ago. Roles are reversed and Shanika won’t turn her back on the person who nurtured, provided, looked after and loved her.

Shanika has looked into finding home-help. While it’s a temporary solution it’s not ideal. Home help is paid help. It’s people coming in to do a job..a job that can only really be done by family, a job that Shanika feels should be done by family. The situation with her parents also means home-help is difficult to find, because of the constant tension between her parents and the fear that outsiders will find out the details of what is an extremely delicate situation.

Shanika knows that other than her daily phone call, her mother doesn’t get the opportunity to converse or interact with anyone. This lack of stimulation coupled with depression exacerbates her mental deterioration. Shanika is being forced to watch from the sidelines as her mother slowly deteriorates into a semi-vegetative state – a mother who she so badly wants to have return to her happy, active and vivacious self.

BritCits bulletin

What a week it has been

Every few weeks, we send a campaign update email to our supporters, including many of those affected. We will share those communications on this website to generally update everyone on the work we do.
In the news:  Our campaign received a lot of media attention this week with BBC taking an active interest, with members of BritCits, and yours truly, on those of us being forced down the Surinder Singh route.
Three platforms:
Petition:
Pls send the below to your MP, lobbying them to attend our big event on 9th July.
Survey: Asthika, a recent member of BritCits is already proving himself invaluable, having composed the following survey (mega thanks!). Pls fill this in and share with all and sundry..would be very useful to have meaningful results..it is anonymous so pls be as honest as you can. Any comments on how it could be made even better, pls let us know.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/VTT2LRT
Lords debate:
Following the family migration debate in the House of Commons, there will be a similar debate in the House of Lords, Main Chamber, on 4th July 4:30 pm. Please attend in person if you can (its first come first serve,and please leave time for security). It is also viewable online on parliament tv.

9th July: If there's one thing you make an effort to take part in re: justice for Brits, let it be taking part on this day. There will be a protest outside the Home Office at 4pm, then meeting in Parliament at 6pm. On this day you will also get to hear the stories from people affected by these very rules - incl many britcits..and politicians and campaigners. It'll be nice to put voices and faces to the names of the stories in the pack (updated pack with lots more stories to come soon..we've been a bit inundated in the last week).
Also sign the letter here, ASAP http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/support-the-right-to-family-life

and get as many people as you can to do so...this letter will be taken personally to No.10 Downing Street by a coalition of MRN, JCWI, FIA, MRS and BritCits, on 9th July..and this is our chance to make it clear to David Cameron how important this issue is for all of us. Please please please, snatch these opportunities.

Steve's put coverage of this on the website as well so do have a browse through. as he updates the website on a nearly daily basis.

Twitter: Pls keep an eye out for tweets on this issue if you're on twitter..and re-tweet to further the message. Several britcits - Emma, Alexis, Les and Ros will be helping share the message..pls do keep an eye out for tweets from them, @sjplep and @britcits
Hope weekend has been good for all.

Sonel

Today's links

https://twitter.com/BritCits :
Let's get this petition to @Number10gov for Tues 9th July supporting family rights of Brits. Sign and share
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/support-the-right-to-family-life
---

https://twitter.com/annamacouzet :
Join @BritCits @JCWInews @The_FIA & @migrants_rights on July 9th against family migration changes http://bit.ly/11SOTuS
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
Lord Roberts presses Govt on the family migration rules in light of the APPG's inquiry and report
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2013-06-26a.147.4

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the report of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Migration on new family migration rules, whether they have plans (1) to commission an independent review of the minimum income requirements, and (2) to review the rules on adult dependants.
---

https://twitter.com/emmabmoussa twitterstorm to get our representatives to represent us.

'The family immigration debate on 4th July from 4:30pm in the Lord's Main Chamber, will you be able to attend?'
---

Reminder :

 Lobby your MP!

Sample letter here :
http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/lobby-your-mp-sample-letter-below.html
---

Is Labour beginning to show a pulse on immigration?

http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2013/07/labour-beginning-show-pulse-immigration
---

Welcome to Europe, Croatia.

http://eumovement.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/croatia-joins-the-eu-today-july-1/
---

https://twitter.com/patelsmie :
US Senate passes far-reaching #immigration reform bill http://bbc.in/11LNqXh  Still diff HoRep ahead. Might still beat #UK to new way fwd!
---

Migration to and from Britain over the last 100 years is the subject of a touching exhibition at Hackney Museum in partnership with the Migration Museum project. 100 donated images document the vast range of experience from those seeking work, refuge or education to those leaving for a new life overseas. 100 Images of Migration runs from 11 June to 31 August and can be viewed at migrationmuseum.org

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gallery/2013/jun/11/photography-immigration

BritCits survey on the rights of British citizens and UK legal residents

Try this please!

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/VTT2LRT

In 2012 the UK Government implemented immigration policies that have changed the rights of British Citizens and Permanent Residents. This survey is to gain insights as to whether the public is aware of these changes, and what you would do to overcome potential challenges.

All information obtained from this survey will be anonymised. Top-line and trend information will be shared as part of an information campaign but under no circumstance will individual responder information or any other information that may be used to identify a responder be shared with anyone outside of the survey administrators.

This survey is organised by BritCits, a socially conscious group of British citizens, advocating for fair rights for other British citizens. For more details, please visit: www.britcits.com