BritCits

Thursday, 11 July 2013

Urgent message from Migrants Rights Network

Dear friend,

Yesterday was a great day for the divided families campaign fighting the family migration rules.

We gained a new influential supporter - the Children's Commissioner for England, Maggie Atkinson - who voiced her concerns about the impacts of the family migration rules on children in Parliament.

Her office would now like to hear directly from families about how these devastating rules are affecting children, so that she can keep speaking out on this issue.

If your children or grandchildren are being affected by the rules, please take 10 minutes as soon as possible to write an email about it to Maggie on childrens.commissioner@childrenscommissioner.gsi.gov.uk

Best wishes,

Please follow up on this urgently if you have children affected by these iniquitous rules. More on the role the Children's Commissioners are taking is here : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/uk-childrens-commissioners-endorse.html

It is so very important to get your stories out there.

Update on 9th July from Sonel

Wow. What a wonderful day yesterday was..thinking about it still makes me smile. Lovely to see so many of you during the day, and those who couldn’t make it, you were there in spirit with the ribbons being used. I’m disappointed I didn’t get to catch up with you all, despite seeing familiar faces (e.g. Andy!)..and others who I knew by name would have been great to place face to name. However, I did spend the time speaking with Julian Huppert MP who is very much on side, and the lawyers handling the parents case. Julian indicated that while some MPs are aware of these rules, many aren't (so it's up to us that every single one of our MPs at least knows this is HUGE). The lawyers have recently filed a case against the new rules on elderly parents - they cited an example of another lawyer whose salary was in 7 figures (so over £1m)..whose father is Canadian...and that even this guy would not qualify to bring his parent over. They did not give specific details on their case, however, its definitely one to watch out for.

No matter how many notes I managed to scrawl down, there is so much more that happened. Others will also be writing up on the day, Steve will post something on the website; there may be recordings available at some point and hopefully not too much of what I say below needs correction. (If you know anyone - perhaps someone you met yesterday - who isn't already on the BritCits database, please ask them to join us so they receive such updates going forward.)

No.10 Downing Street: 2pm saw an alliance of JCWI, MRN, FIA, Preethpal Singh (active in Southampton region) and BritCits meet at Downing Street. Hugely grateful to MRN for arranging this for us all..to present a petition, the BritCits pack and other supporting documentation, evidencing the unfairness of the rules, to go straight to David Cameron and his staff. You may well have seen some photos of us outside the number 10 door via the MRN newsletter, twitter, FB etc. BBC camera people were present...I’m not sure yet where our footage will be used..but it’s there and they cared enough about this issue to be there.

Home Office protest: From there we moved on to the Home Office, where I’m told there were 150-200 protestors..chanting led by Guy (JCWI) and britcit Asthika, sharing their situations and campaigning for a change in the rules. It was fun and just good to feel as well as be, united in the journey to force change. Fantastic group showing the diversity of the impact of the rules..something I’m actually grateful for. If it only affected one minority group, or one region, perhaps we wouldn’t have felt the togetherness which is so required to ensure we get the politicians being paid to represent us, to do so fairly. I was saddened that a child of about 12 knew the word deport..and enough to say ‘don’t deport my daddy’. Lost innocence.

Parliamentary meeting: Finally the meeting at Houses of Parliament ..it was packed..people were sitting in the aisles, others standing on the side and photos of only some of the families along the walls showed that in the interest of a migration target, what some politicians have been able to overlook is that their rules are impacting real people, real families..honest hardworking decent Brits, because they dared to have family members from a region of the world outside the European Economic Area.

Michael Allen, a student at Warwick University said 20% of the students at his uni are international; he pushed for immigration taking account of humans and mocked Cameron who on a trip to Kazakhstan made a comment about missing his wife after a few days apart, when with his rules, many Brits have not seen their family for months or even years.

Fawzia Whittuck then spoke of her son Steve, her daughter in law Yoko and her granddaughter, Rika..all stuck in Japan. This family JUST satisfies the savings threshold...however they are still having trouble getting through the rules. They are convinced the rules as they are breach article 8 of the Human Rights Act, and despite the fact that both of Steve’s parents were born in the UK, he now feels unwelcome in his own country because of the way his wife has been treated. A feeling echoed no doubt by many in the room.

Next speaker was KeithVaz, MP. We should of course be grateful he gave us the 5 or so mins for which he was in the room. He once again spoke of his family history; Keith’s parents are the quintessential migrants, moving from Goa to Mumbai, then to Yemen, and then to the UK, where they arrived with Keith and his two sisters. He expressed his gratitude to the campaign group and his pleasure that Sarah Teather MP had escaped captivity, allowing her to speak out against these rules (in this I believe he was referred to the fact that Sarah is no longer a Minister and therefore less restrained in what she is and isn’t allowed to say).
He said he was glad the High Court challenged the current limits, mentioning the average salary in his constituency in Leicester is around £16k...Leicester, a city of migrants he called it. He said the Home Affairs Select Committee would have a look at the rules at the request of Julian Huppert MP (lovely, lovely man who grew up in the same area in Australia as me..small world!). He also said that the Home Affairs Select Committee had Boris Johnson as their star witness, who when questioned on whether amnesty should be given to ‘illegal’ (I’m sure he meant undocumented) migrants, said yes.
BritCits along with no doubt other groups, will be contacting his staff to ensure he fulfils the promised re: looking at the rules.

Maggie Atkinson, Children’s Commissioner for England then spoke about the impact of these rules on kid; she said fairness has been sacrificed to achieve a goal, which is just numbers. Also said the rules do NOT reflect the commitment from the coalition. She gave a example of case with a British woman with a child in South Africa from a marriage which broke down; here neither the entry clearance officer, nor the immigration judge’s appeal took account of the child’s wishes, which is something required under Article 12. She supports the APPG’s call on the govt to review the rules..waiting to April 2015 is too long, especially in the life of a child. These kind of rules are not right for a family friendly nation.

Marianne Bailey then spoke up..this is someone who is a designer, entrepreneur and even involved in an eco-vehicle project which will not only reduce the impact on the environment, but also taxpayers money. Her husband is Japanese and she is likely to give birth in the next week or so. She is a lecturer at two universities, and despite the fact that she earns over £18,600, because of the nature of her contracts being by term, three out of her four sources of income have been disregarded by UKBA. She was clearly gutted her husband’s income..even while she was on maternity leave, would not count. At one point I thought Marianne would breakdown in tears, and all in the room were likely ready to console her..when her next announcement of the fact that she owns TWO properties in London, and one outright..NO MORTGAGE!..don’t count towards the savings..which means she will need to sell a property just to hit the strangely concocted savings figure.    Despite having assets, savings, qualifications needed in the UK and an exciting project for our country, she has already been disqualified with Mark Harper telling her husband he had to leave the country. This is one woman who was intent on not giving birth without her husband..which several young mums in the room had already been forced to go through.
Marianne made an excellent point in that where a spouse applies for any other visa allowing them to enter the UK, even for a visit, they are refused as UKBA considers this as circumvention of the spouse visa rules. She said these rules were against our fundament rights as laid out in the Magna Carta to live in our country of nationality. These rules prevent 61% of EMPLOYED British women from sponsoring their spouses based on the £18,600 threshold..when Marianne questioned whether the government then thought this 61% were benefit scroungers, a resounding yes was given by Don Flynn of Migrants Rights Network.
Marianne’s story especially seemed to touch the following speakers; it is very hard to remain untouched when a woman about to give birth is imploring you to let her family just be.

Next up was the amazing SarahTeather, MP. She said the rules are based on a policy divorced from real life. In her words, they are ‘bonkers’, and fail even on their own criteria about economic impact on the UK. Her view is that these rules are ONLY about driving down numbers based on an arbitrary cap. She requested we all contact our MPs, ensure they know this is an issue and force them to take it up on our behalf in parliament. As much as she and several others MPs are doing, they need more on the panel, more MPs to stand up against the Home Office..and this is something that only we, as constituents and voters can get pushed through.

Kate Green MPre-affirmed these rules are not about saving money..they are not in the interest of children and not in the interest of families.

Baroness Hamwee – who spoke up loudly on this issue at the House of Lords debate last week, had just one main message: Let’s keep fighting.

Fiona McTaggart MP has been campaigning for migration and justice since the 1970s. Her message was and always has been that there should not be a means test on love. She spoke of her earlier associations with Mark Harper..where he had promised to consider some concessions, such as allowing for the using of property as an asset...however, weeks later no response which she finds is typical of the Home Office. She was amused to see that some UKBA officers earn below £18,600 – so the people keeping spouses apart are earning an insufficient amount themselves. She echoed Sarah Teather in saying the rules are bonkers, and went one further, also calling them stupid J    She spoke of one of her constituents, who despite working at Sainsburys and having a second job earns below £18,600. His wife is from Pakistan and is a university graduate, so would likely to be able get a good job here herself job = paying taxes and NI contributions!). She quoted the min wage figure annualised being £12,627.
There was a bit of an attack on the Tories (not undeserved of course), that if they wanted to be family friendly, the record should be looked at. Labour she said is the only part which has made it easier for families to be together, getting rid of the Primary Purpose rule which kept couples in genuine, albeit arranged, marriages apart. (Note, arranged marriages are not sham marriages..they’re a concept that has existed in UK’s own not too distant history. So glass houses, stones and all that.)

Stephen Bowen, of British Institute of Human Rights then spoke regarding his view that the rules are a startling breach of human rights obligation, and that they’re unlikely to survive scrutiny by courts. All human rights apart, there is none more important than the right to a family life. He expressed concern over the threshold being so much above the minimum wage..saying the people most affected by these are going to be care workers in hospitals, soldiers in the army..and those who serve us coffee even. Every day people. He is convinced these rules are so shocking a breach of human rights that they will NOT survive court scrutiny. The right of a British citizen to live in their own country is a constitutional right...so imposing self-exile of divided family on Brits is not on.

Thomas Ebsford spoke about his family in Ghana..and was applauded when he pointed out UK does not complain when migrants pay their taxes, happily taking these.

Don Flynn of MRN summarised the immigration policy as ill-considered and ill-thought out...and that the consequences were identifiable immediately from when the rules were announced. Yet Mark Harper indicating the consequences –couples forced apart, kids born without their dad present, well-off professionals being unable to look after ageing parents, Brits forced into self-exile – were not unintended. (!)..begging the question how does he sleep at night?!
Finally we had comments from the floor from several people. Elderly dependants issue was mentioned as inhumane (ban masquerading as a rule); sex discrimination hitting women even more, with lower average salaries though the rules were hitting all including men in regions outside London/South East. Another member of the audience spoke of her inability to look after her mum living alone overseas (Russia). There was a primary school teacher currently undergoing training for when he starts his job (paying over £18,600) in September..which means he will only be able to apply for a spouse visa after March 2014 (plus however long it takes to process the application is how long this couple will be apart). The irony here though is that a man entrusted with the welfare of our children is being forced to be apart from his family and even miss the birth of his own child. I’ve said this before and I can’t say it enough times. Even if the rules change right now, those who have already been affected will never forget; kids will grow up knowing their dad missed the first few days, weeks, months and in some cases years of their life..and they won’t forgive.

Concluding the meeting was the fantastic Habib Rahman from JCWI: he said these rules have attacked everybody and implored everyone to keep sharing their stories (pls pls pls send in your story for inclusion in the pack....collating the stories makes it much more powerful), lobby your MPs, don’t let them brush you off. Be vocal about things, go to your local paper even. Raise awareness. His message very clearly was an unequivocal, we will win!

The message across the board therefore is, contact your MP..ask them for a surgery appointment. Ask them to raise your case with Mark Harper and Theresa May (don't be disheartened as the first response you get back will be standard spiel about not being a burden on taxpayers etc). Pursue. Keep writing. Take up your MPs time on this issue so much that they will be overloaded with immigration casework. So mcuh so they will want the rules changed just to get you to leave them alone. These people represent us. Thats what theyre paid for. So while being reasonable, don't let them get away with ignoring you, brushing away your concerns. Get your friends and family to also lobby their MP. Ask questions. Ask why.

We are in this together, and together, as Habib said, we will win.

Sonel (BritCits)

Why I'm supporting the Divided Families Campaign. - by https://twitter.com/Michael_K_Allen

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/michael-allen/why-im-supporting-the-div_b_3553974.html

Imagine if you were woken up in the middle of the night by government officials banging on your door saying they had come to take your partner away from you. The reason? You earn less than £18,600 per year.

This is not precisely how it happened, but it gives the uninitiated an idea of how thousands of Brits in love with non-EU citizens would have felt like on July 9, 2012, when the government introduced the new family migration rules.

These stipulated that a British person must earn £18,600 to sponsor a foreign spouse from outside the EU to stay with them in the UK. If they have a child, the figure rises to £22,400 plus an additional £2,400 for every child after that.

Up until these rules were introduced, I never thought politics would affect me much. Sure, I'd studied it as part of my degree in an abstract fashion and knew all the latest developments on the political scene from my keen interest in the news. Policy after policy was churned out, none of them changing my life in any observably significant way. I even managed to avoid the tuition fee hike, being one of the last fortunate group of students to pay the lower fees.

But when these rules came in, my life was changed forever. The person I had fallen in love with at university and was hoping to make a life with after graduation would have to be taken away from me....
---

One year on BIHR looks at migration and family rights.

http://www.bihr.org.uk/news/one-year-on-bihr-looks-migration-and-family-right

It seems as though barely a week goes by without the “controversy” of human rights in immigration cases hitting the headlines. Last year the Immigration Rules were changed, and took effect on 9 July 2012. These changes seek to, among other things, define the conditions in which the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8) will apply in all family migration cases - not only cases of deportation of those convicted of crime, and in cases involving children.

One year after the Immigration Rules became law, there remains significant confusion– including in public commentary - about the Rules, whether they represent the intention of Parliament, and who they affect. Whilst there is no dispute that controlling immigration is a legitimate aim explicitly recognised by human rights law, the important question is whether the solution that has been pursued in the Rules is a fair and proportionate response, or whether there are better, more appropriate avenues to explore.

As Stephen Bowen of British Institute of Human Rights said : These rules are bonkers.
---

The UKBA are destroying my family.

Powerful testimony.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIaG-udohcs&feature=youtu.be

Facebook :
https://www.facebook.com/TheUkbaAreDestroyingMyFamily
---

Kingswinford church pastor’s Brazilian wife denied entry to UK in rule change.

A church pastor says his 13-year marriage to a Brazilian woman is being ‘ripped apart’ by immigration bosses who are refusing her entry to the UK - because he cannot provide six payslips.

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2013/07/08/kingswinford-church-pastors-brazilian-wife-denied-entry-to-uk-in-rule-change/

Robert Cooper immediately fell in love with his wife Adna while working as a missionary in Sao Paulo and after six months married her at Kingswinford Christian Centre. The pair then worked and settled in the region for three years.

But after returning to the South American country for nine years to teach English at a private school and then run a church, Mr Cooper has been told by the Border Agency that he cannot bring back his wife to this country.

The problem lies with new immigration rules brought in last July which mean only British people who show they have earned more than £18,600 a year can sponsor their non-European spouse’s visa.
---

Government gets sums wrong over migrant family rules, says report.

http://www.relocatemagazine.com/immigration-a-visas/immigration-a-visa-news-main/8218--government-gets-sums-wrong-over-migrant-family-rules-says-report

Tough new regulations aimed at curbing the number of migrants entitled to bring their families into Britain could end up costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds, according to a report published on Tuesday.

Last year, the UK set a minimum earnings requirement of £18,600 – or more if there were children involved – for a non-EU immigrant wishing to bring his or her spouse into the country. The government has estimated that the move will save taxpayers £660 million over 10 years through welfare, NHS and education savings.

But Tuesday's report from Middlesex University claims that the new rules will actually cost the taxpayer up to £850 million, rather than make any savings.

The report argues that the government has failed to take fully into account migrants' earnings and says that preventing a partner from entering the UK is likely to increase welfare claims as single people are more likely to draw on state support if alone.
---

Jimmy Mubenga: Heathrow deportee 'unlawfully killed'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-23244203

A man being deported to Angola on a British Airways flight was unlawfully killed by guards who were restraining him, an inquest jury has found.
---

"They took all our money and beat my sister": Migrants at the mercy of the Greek coastguard.
http://www2.amnesty.org.uk/blogs/press-release-me-let-me-go/they-took-all-our-money-and-beat-my-sister-migrants-mercy-greek?utm_source=Social&utm_medium=Twitter&utm_campaign=Refugee&utm_content=Greece_report_blog

Tuesday, 9 July 2013

How new UK spouse visa rules turned me into an Englishman in exile.

A great article by one of our supporters.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/uk-australia-spouse-visa#start-of-comments

Think of exiles in modern history, and you think of people forced to live away from where? Castro’s Cuba? Franco’s Spain? Apartheid South Africa? Well, now you can add David Cameron’s UK to that list. And no, that’s not a typo – nor am I about to make a leftie jibe about people who can’t bear to live under the Tories or another series of Downton Abbey. I’m talking about real exiles; people who cannot go back to their homeland. People like me.

Today marks the first anniversary of draconian changes introduced by the British government to visas for foreign spouses brought in by home secretary Theresa May. There are two key features of the new rules: first, the Brit (and only the Brit) has to have an income of £18,600 before the visa can even be applied for; second, the probationary period before permanent residency is granted ("indefinite leave to remain"), increased from two years to five.

The changes are barring thousands of British expats around the world from going home. In my own case, my Australian wife and I planned a 2013 return to England with our two sons after almost five years in Sydney. But when we looked into getting her a visa earlier this year – something I’d always assumed would be a simple formality – we discovered it would be impossible...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/152597079/An-Englishman-in-Exile
---

High Court delivers the final nail to the Government’s absurd £18,600 minimum income requirement.

http://43templerow.co.uk/high-court-delivers-the-final-nail-to-the-governments-absurd-18600-minimum-income-requirement/

...The Court noted that it was a fundamental domestic law right for a British sponsor to reside in the United Kingdom without let or hindrance and that it is unreasonable to expect him/her to have to leave the United Kingdom solely in order to live with their spouse or family (even where such a move is perfectly possible). To expect a British citizen to relocate amounts to a serious interference with the right of residence which the judge described as “considerably more intrusive interference” than ‘colossal’. A Refugee, by virtue of the very status, does not have the ability to relocate to their home country or a third state in order to live with their spouse or family.

Further, the Judge noted that to set the figure significantly higher than even the £13,400 gross annual wage at minimum wage levels effectively denied young people and many thousands of low-wage earners in full time employment the ability to be joined by their non-EEA spouses from abroad unless they happen to have wealthy relatives or to have won the lottery. This frustrates the right of British citizens and Refugees to live with their chosen partner and found a family unless such modest earnings could be supplemented by any reasonably substantial savings, third party support of the future earnings of the spouse seeking admission.

The Judge further criticised the minimum income provisions for excluding in its calculation verifiable third party support, future earnings of the incoming spouse and any savings below £16,000.

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 rule changes.
---

Divided Families ribbon :
https://twitter.com/BritCits/status/354351055032692737/photo/1

Monday, 8 July 2013

Affected families and charities protest against the immigration rules splitting up families

Marking the first anniversary of the new family migration rules, hundreds of British families are planned to gather outside the Home Office building in London to voice their frustration with the rules keeping them apart from their spouses, children and parents.

The protest comes soon after a series of Parliamentary debates and a report which condemned the rules for being unfair and last week’s court decision which rules the income level of £18,600 disproportionate.

Prior to the demonstration a delegation of Divided Families campaign representatives will present a petition letter to David Cameron, calling him to review the rules in light of his promise to lead the most family friendly Government we've ever had.

The family migration rules introduced in July 2012 require British citizens wishing to sponsor a non-EU spouse to show minimum earnings of £18,600 per year. Rules include restrictions on individuals wishing to bring their parents to the UK.

JCWI Chief Exec, Habib Rahman said “The pain caused by Theresa May in her reckless pursuit of lower net migration is astounding. It hurts couples, children and families. It also hurts the economy, it denies the kind of upbringing David Cameron says he supports to thousands of children. The sooner this Government starts to prioritise family life over tabloid headlines the better.”

Chris Mead of the Family Immigration Alliance commented that the rules threaten a second class of citizenship for thousands of working British families. "By placing the onus of an income threshold solely on the sponsor, the government fails to acknowledge the modern reality of a family's income, with spouses supporting each other in tough times. These rules have consigned British sponsors to a painful and forced separation from their spouses and children. The government must stop 'means testing' such a basic human need."

BritCits founders Steve Green and Sonel Mehta are calling on the government to reconsider immigration rules devastating British citizens across the UK: those earning over £100,000 unable to sponsor parents because of rules impossible to meet; young mums forced to choose between kids and their spouse; Brits forced into exile or unable to return home with barriers to re-entry too high with a non-EU spouse in tow; debt-free pensioners pushed into working for income they don't need; couples delaying children out of fear of UKBA and ever-changing rules; birthdays, anniversaries, even birth of kids being celebrated on Skype...the legacy of broken relationships, marriages, families will not come cheap, affecting not only our economy but the very moral fabric of our nation.

Ruth Grove-White, Policy director at Migrants' Rights Network said, 'being able to start a family in your own country should not be subject to the amount of money you make. The rules are causing unneeded hardship for almost 18,000 families a year and it is time for the Government to take action and review this policy."

The Divided Families Ribbon

The creator says :
'We came up with the idea to wear a combination of red and orange ribbon. Red for love and orange in support of human rights and a harmonious multicultural society. (An orange ribbon is worn on Harmony Day in Australia which coincides with the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The Initiative Go Orange for Tibet also used an orange ribbon to encourage sportsmen to highlight human rights violation in Tibet before, during and after the Olympic Games 2008 in Beijing. In Singapore, the orange ribbon is also promoted as a symbol of racial and religious harmony.)'

Wear it with pride, especially on Divided Families Day.

Ahead of the big day ...

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1 :
Divided Families Day of Action - 9 July 2013 http://wp.me/p1Zj2l-2kf

Tomorrow is the Divided Families Day of Action, which will take place in London. It’s already been a year since the new rules were introduced and on the first anniversary, Migrants Rights Network, BritCits, JCWI, the Family Immigration Alliance and others have organised two main events:

Afternoon demonstration outside the Home Office with speakers and street performers – 4pm – Home Office, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF
Evening meeting in Parliament chaired by Baroness Ruth Lister bringing together campaigners, supporters and parliamentarians to hear about the impacts of the new rules. The meeting will welcome valuable supporters including Maggie Atkinson, the Children’s Commissioner for England, and will be a chance for families to share their stories and build the campaign for a change in the rules – 6pm – Parliament, Committee room 10, London SW1A 0AA

Hope to see you there.

---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
Attacks from House of Lords and High Court build momentum of family migration campaign http://j.mp/12R7jri

Last week the campaign to end new rules on family migration took a major step forward with a debate in the House of Lords, followed by a significant judgment in the High Court.
---

https://twitter.com/JCWInews :
Tuesday pm: sit in office or chip off early and give Home Sec an earful over immigration controls splitting familes?
http://www.jcwi.org.uk/blog/2013/06/24/streets-come-westminster

In case you missed it on Friday, there was a pretty good result in court in Birmingham
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23198144#
---

https://twitter.com/GuidoTallman :
It's rough, it's ready, it does the job! Home Offuce, Tuesday 4pm
https://twitter.com/GuidoTallman/status/353983892778278912/photo/1
---

https://twitter.com/migrants_rights :
Tomorrow, we are taking the #FamilyMigration petition to @downingstreet Make sure you've added your signature!
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/support-the-right-to-family-life

Sunday, 7 July 2013

Be there!

Be there!

http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/9th-july.html

https://twitter.com/JCWInews :
Two days and 3 and a half hrs. See you at the home office to start beating down these pernicious migration rules!

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanabata

7th July is Tanabata in the Japanese festival calendar, which is a suitable date to have in the run up to divided families day on 9th July.

From Wikipedia :
It is said that Tanabata asked Mikeran to weave one thousand sandals and bury them under the bamboo tree and they'd surely meet again. Mikeran wove the sandals and buried them under the bamboo tree as Tanabata had asked. When the tree grew, Mikeran climbed up to find that he was one step short. In his haste, he had used one sandal fewer than necessary, causing the tree to grow one step short. Mikeran called out to Tanabata and she came and lifted him up. Mikeran's father wasn't pleased so he gave Mikeran the difficult job of watching a melon field for three days and nights without touching a single melon. Mikeran however grew very thirsty watching the melons that he touched one. The melon immediately turned into a flowing river forever separating Mikeran and Tanabata. Tanabata pleaded with her father to let her see Mikeran again. Feeling sorry for his daughter, he allows them to see each other on the 7th day of the 7th month.

Paper crane for family safety, health, and long life.

Tanabata is associated with the stars Altair and Vega, which are high in the northern hemisphere's summer sky; together with Deneb, they form the Summer Triangle.
---

National treasure David Attenborough's adopted sisters were asylum seekers and played a critical role in his interest in natural history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Attenborough

During World War II, through a British government initiative known as Kindertransport, his parents also fostered two Jewish refugee girls from Europe.

Attenborough spent his childhood collecting fossils, stones and other natural specimens. He received encouragement in this pursuit at age seven, when a young Jacquetta Hawkes admired his "museum." A few years later, one of his adoptive sisters gave him a piece of amber filled with prehistoric creatures; some 50 years later, it would be the focus of his programme The Amber Time Machine.

Kindertransport statue, Liverpool Street station.

Kindertransport statue, Berlin.

Scenes from Planet Earth, scenery to the max : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v2L2UGZJAM

Lest we forget ... we've fought these battles before :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/jun/08/immigration.immigrationandpublicservices

"'The way stateless Jews from Germany are pouring in from every port of this country is becoming an outrage . . .' In these words, Mr Herbert Metcalfe, the Old Street magistrate, yesterday referred to the number of aliens entering the country through the 'back door' - a problem to which the Daily Mail has repeatedly pointed."
Daily Mail, August 20, 1938

Never forget. - http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/immigration
---

Doctors condemn plan to ban foreigners from organ transplants on NHS.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10158331/Doctors-condemn-plan-to-ban-foreigners-from-organ-transplants-on-NHS.html

Dr Clare Gerada, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said the proposals were unethical and “fuelled by hysteria”.

She said: “I don’t believe there is a problem with ‘health tourism’ to the extent that the Government has claimed - if someone is suffering renal failure they would usually be too sick to make the journey here, but if a person is here, and they need a transplant, what kind of country would deny them?”

Dr Gerada added: “We are supposed to have a humane health service. The idea that a woman goes into labour and a hospital won’t take her unless she has a credit card is something that is really unethical and deeply at odds with our values.”

https://twitter.com/TheHumanTorpedo :
Cameron is only at Wimbledon to make sure Djokovic pays for any medical treatment he receives.
---

In rural Tennessee, a new way to help hungry children: A bus turned bread truck.

wapo.st/180n2xv

A 5-year-old girl saw the dust trail of the bus and pedaled toward it on a red tricycle. Three teenage boys came barefoot in swimsuits. A young mother walked over from her trailer with an infant daughter in one arm and a lit cigarette in the other. “Any chance there will be leftover food for adults?” she asked. It was almost 1 p.m. For some, this would be the first meal of the day. For others, the last.

Sunday morning

‘Mistakes’ by Home Office in case of Haywards Heath dad facing deportation.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10529653.___Mistakes____by_Home_Office_in_case_of_Haywards_Heath_dad_facing_deportation/?ref=fbrec&fb_action_ids=10151708185509630&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

The Government department which wants to deport a fatherof- three has admitted mistakes were made with his visa application.

Australian Phil Sommerville faces being shipped out of the country, leaving his British wife and three children behind in Bolnore Village, near Haywards Heath.

A Home Office employee has now admitted there were “several errors” in letters sent to the family – including spelling their surname wrongly, incorrectly recording dates and erroneous visa restrictions – giving the impression the application “was not carefully considered”.
---

The Coalition's new policy: Blame the immigrants.

http://www.tmponline.org/2013/07/06/xenophobia-as-policy/

It is not dog-whistle politics when you can hear the xenophobic klaxon. We, the black, the migrant, can’t call it “racist”, as the definition of the word has been taken away from us. What is “racist”, is the hatred of the other, based on their biology, their skin pigmentation. Apparently it is not racist to the deny the basic humanity of those who were not born in the same artificial nation-state that you happened to find yourself in. We are instructed that “racism” is the murder of Stephen Lawrence, but not the state-orchestrated death of Ama Sumani, a Ghanaian woman who had children in Britain but was sent to die because of a bureaucratic oversight. Nick Griffin is showcased by liberals as the epitome of the politics of “hate” but apparently there is nothing hateful or racist about the murder of Jimmy Mubenga and treatment of asylum seekers.
---

UK's confused immigration policy: Britain puts India on high-risk list after laying out red carpet.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/nri/visa-and-immigration/uks-confused-immigration-policy-britain-puts-india-on-high-risk-list-after-laying-out-red-carpet/articleshow/20947144.cms

The high-risk list proposal comes on the heels of sweeping immigration reforms announced by the UK government. Over the past few months the UK has unveiled a series of steps to clamp down on non-European Union immigrants. These include strict measures against landlords renting homes to illegal immigrants and charging non-European migrants to use the National Health Service. Potential immigrants from outside Europe must also earn at least £18,600 to bring their spouses to the UK.

Slight but important correction here : The rules apply to British citizens of whatever origin, including those native-born. Yet again the press is missing one of the key points about these iniquitous rules.
The rules are so bad no sane person can quite believe them.

---

https://twitter.com/emmabmoussa :
Looking forward to the 9th July demonstration with my friends @BritCits @sjplep @smeashy @The_FIA @migrants_rights @JCWInews @GuidoTallman

Saturday, 6 July 2013

9th July

Tuesday 9th July plan of action.

All the details are here :

http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/divided-families-day-of-action.html
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/events/2013/divided-families-day-action
http://www.jcwi.org.uk/blog/2013/06/24/streets-come-westminster

The order of events is as follows :

4pm - Home Office, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF
    Afternoon demonstration outside the Home Office with speakers and street performers - bring a banner!!

We'll meet outside the Home Office and start the protest on the dot at 4 pm. There's a great selection of speakers, bring a banner. Examples of flyers you can use or amend are here - http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/flyers - but be creative.

It's close to Westminster, St James's Park and Victoria Tube. Map here :
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=2+marsham+street&ie=UTF-8&ei=zDPYUfb0K8TK0AXq-4HYBA&sqi=2&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg

   6pm - Parliament, Committee room 10, London SW1A 0AA
    Evening meeting in Parliament chaired by Baroness Ruth Lister bringing together campaigners, supporters and parliamentarians to hear about the impacts of the new rules. The meeting will welcome valuable supporters including Maggie Atkinson, the Children's Commissioner for England, and will be a chance for families to share their stories and build the campaign for a change in the rules.

Again, a very good selection of speakers.
There's a bit of a space issue (we're way over capacity) as there has been so much interest - so bear that in mind and do attend the 4 pm protest in any event.

---

Why attend the protest?

On 9th July 2012, the government introduced rules which set an income threshold so high that 47% of British people could not live with their spouse, if their spouse or partner came from outside the EEA. At the same time, they did a lot of other things as well: closing the route for elderly dependants; drastically raising the bar on the language requirement; increasing the time to indefinite leave to remain from two to five years - thereby setting people up for failure by reducing the employability of foreign partners, for no good reason; discounting the income of the foreign partner, therefore locking even middle- or high- income families into exile; horrendously complicating rules for the self-employed, so that even the comfortably off will struggle; forcing working class women and men into single parenthood.

They did this without a proper debate in Parliament; they introduced this through secondary legislation. When challenged by the courts, a perfunctory debate was held in the Lords. Harsh, draconian rules which divide the families of British citizens were introduced without the knowledge of most people, or even many parliamentarians, in this country.

These rules are yet another attack on the rights of migrant communities. But they are also an attack on British citizens' rights. The right to fall in love, to marry and settle with whom you choose. The right of children to be with their parents, the right of people to be with their loved ones. Maybe more important than rights, they represent an attack on our values; the value of family, the value of marriage, the value of childhood itself. This is an attack on British citizens on the basis of income maybe unprecendented since the era of the workhouse. It must be challenged.

We had a great result in the courts last week, and we've had a great result with the APPG report and parliamentary debates, as well as media interest. The pressure needs to be maintained.

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 3^rd 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/

Pages