Stark choice under new immigration rules: exile or family breakup

Just been watching on BBC iPlayer.  TM proposes:

Couple:  £18,600
Couple + 1 child:  £22,000
£2,400 per additional child

No mention of the attachment hurdle though.

Again, as has been said before nobody can really properly react until the proposals have been announced.

I wonder however how the proposals would stand up to any form of legal challenge (ECHR or other).

Family settlement is one of the biggest routes for bringing people into the UK--that's why they're targeting it.

Is it? Not according to their 2011 statistics.

Last year UKBA issued 2,272,371 visas outside the UK. Of those, 45,697 were family settlement visas.... that's only 2% of the total number of visas issued.

In comparison, they issued 149,181 work visas (6.5%) and 322,653 student visas (14%), and then 1,740,694 million 'Other visas' (1,708,366 of which were visitor/transit visas and 19,881 were EEA family permits).

So, not counting the visitor visas, as they don't allow you to legally live in the UK, that leaves 564,005 visas issued. Of those, 57% were student visas, 26% were work visas and just 8% were family settlement visas.

The way I see it, even if they cut back on the number of settlement visas issued, it's still not going to reduce total immigration by all that much.

And the issue is that they can't do anything about migration within the EEA (which seems to be the main cause of increased immigration in recent years). Anyone from the other 26 EEA countries can come to the UK without a visa, live here and claim benefits... and there's nothing UKBA/the Home Office can do about it. So instead they're targeting all the other visa types. They've already tightened the rules for work and student visas, the focus now is on family settlement visas.

Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-tabs-q4-2011/ (third table from top)

Unless I've misunderstood those numbers (very possible!), then it's actually impossible for them to get net migration down to tens of thousands like they want to. Even if they stopped considering students as immigrants* and froze the family path, they still have far more work visas than "tens of thousands". To get net migration down, you'd actually have to have loads more people *leaving*, not just lower the number of people coming in - which seems to fall in line with what rynn_aka_rae (and a few others) said above. I suppose they could remove students from the count and strictly limit work visas and then make the numbers on cuts alone to family visas - but this seems to fly in the face of the supposed drive for immigrants that can do something for Britian (which, in my understanding of how it's been put, means people coming here to provide essential services and fill specific employment gaps).

*The main reason I mention this is because every few days there's an article in the TES about how important overseas students are to the education sector.  We even had one in our local paper. Weirdly, a lot of universities are currently looking to recruit MORE overseas students, IIRC. With things as they are, they simply can't make the numbers work without a massive annual exodus, at least as I see it.

The interview transcript is now available for anyone interested:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0080bbs/features/transcripts2012

Thank you, Aquila.

Is it? Not according to their 2011 statistics.

Last year UKBA issued 2,272,371 visas outside the UK. Of those, 45,697 were family settlement visas.... that's only 2% of the total number of visas issued.

In comparison, they issued 149,181 work visas (6.5%) and 322,653 student visas (14%), and then 1,740,694 million 'Other visas' (1,708,366 of which were visitor/transit visas and 19,881 were EEA family permits).

So, not counting the visitor visas, as they don't allow you to legally live in the UK, that leaves 564,005 visas issued. Of those, 57% were student visas, 26% were work visas and just 8% were family settlement visas.

The way I see it, even if they cut back on the number of settlement visas issued, it's still not going to reduce total immigration by all that much.

And the issue is that they can't do anything about migration within the EEA (which seems to be the main cause of increased immigration in recent years). Anyone from the other 26 EEA countries can come to the UK without a visa, live here and claim benefits... and there's nothing UKBA/the Home Office can do about it. So instead they're targeting all the other visa types. They've already tightened the rules for work and student visas, the focus now is on family settlement visas.

Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-tabs-q4-2011/ (third table from top)

While I agree that in terms of numbers issued in comparison to work and student routes, family is low. However, I just want to point out that students are not considered immigrants, in my experience, because they are merely viewed as visitors. They've shut down PSW and reduced tier 1, so students have very little option to stay in the UK once they have completed their courses, except for family route and work. They like students (and their money) they just don't want them to stay. If you take away students and measure what is expected to lead to settlement, *if I did the numbers correctly* that means family settlement accounts for 18.9% of long term non-EEA settlers.

I still stand by my stance that the UKBA does not want immigrants who will merely make ends meet. They want investment and people who make a lot of money. Also I imagine the tighter restrictions also has to do with students who now have run out of options. Maybe sounds a little farfetched but historically (outside the UK) when work visa options run out, family reunification increases.

Do you think they could make a transitional arrangement for this though? Ie you meet the requirements when applying for the Fiance Visa - new rules come in - you apply for FLR - you are still bound by the rules that were in place when you first applied for the FIance Visa?

This is a sad and unjust change.

BUT

Don't you find it a bit ironic that voters who voted this government in to cut immigration may now be forced to leave themselves because of its policies??

Be careful what you wish for.

Just a thought...

Do you think they could make a transitional arrangement for this though?

They could, and we hope they would.  Those involved in advocacy during the consultation were given the impression that those already in the pipeline wouldn't be affected by the new requirements.  (ETA - I wouldn't put too much faith in anything until it's officially announced though... just in case!)

They could, and we hope they would.  Those involved in advocacy during the consultation were given the impression that those already in the pipeline wouldn't be affected by the new requirements.

Thanks, are you referring to the letters from Damien Green who said those already on the family path would not be affected by the changes? something to that effect?

Do you think they could make a transitional arrangement for this though? Ie you meet the requirements when applying for the Fiance Visa - new rules come in - you apply for FLR - you are still bound by the rules that were in place when you first applied for the FIance Visa?

Yes, I think they will - that is what the whole 'grandfathering' thing is about.

If you applied for a fiance visa under the old rules, then you were let into the country and allowed on the family visa path based on the current requirements. It wouldn't exactly be fair to suddenly expect you to acquire an extra few thousand pounds of income a few weeks/months later when they just said you were okay with a lower income.

In my experience of changes to visas over the last 5 years, grandfathering is common and usually the rule changes will only affect new applications outside the UK.

For example, they got rid of the Tier 1 General visa in April 2011, however, people who are already living in the UK on a Tier 1 visas are still allowed to apply for a Tier 1 extension when their visa expires, even though technically the visa no longer exists. They can also still apply for ILR after 5 years in the UK on Tier 1.

Similarly with Tier 2 General - the new restrictions on income for ILR will only apply to people who apply for ILR after April 2016... which means that the majority of people who are already in the UK on work permits or Tier 2 visas will still be able to qualify for ILR under the current/old requirements (i.e. only people who got their visas after April 2011 will not reach 5 years in the UK before April 2016).

And not related to immigration, but similar things have occurred in other areas... like when the government introduced top-up fees for university students. They announced the new fees in 2004, but said that the higher fees would only apply to new undergraduates who started university after a certain date (2006/07 academic year)... so anyone already enrolled in university at this time would still only pay the lower fees - my brother was a student from 2004-2008 and he paid the lower fees (just over £1,000 per year) for the entire 4 years.

ksand24, thanks, that would be great if they do as my fiance applied for her Fiance Visa a few days ago and would hate it if when we apply for the FLR after we get married they deport her, what a wedding gift that would be

This is a sad and unjust change.

BUT

Don't you find it a bit ironic that voters who voted this government in to cut immigration may now be forced to leave themselves because of its policies??

Be careful what you wish for.

Just a thought...

The only way the government can significantly cut immigration is not open to it - to withdraw from the European Union/European Economic Area.

We are just about to apply for spousal visa from in the USA, for my American husband Very worried about the changes, we were planning on moving in August as I have a doctorate position offer with 14,400 pound tax free bursary, we were planning on giving third party support but concerned about the minimum income and whether third party support will be allowed. Any thoughts?