Originally Posted by Terpe
Chinese whispers
Yes talk to you later Rob chin up mate i a bit down & concerned also
Just signed this petition
Thanks for the reassurances terpe i feel a whole lot more at ease now you have explained some of the issues
well 1623 looked but how many signed ?looks like i will have to work 23 hrs to bee in a chance to get near there limit and 1hr of sleep
i only see 110 signitures on the petition page so far
done
It's the 'one fits all' aspect of this that is so grossly unfair, and is DISCRIMINATORY .
Unfortunately, this statement applies on many aspects of our lives, not just this subject.It's the 'one fits all' aspect of this that is so grossly unfair, and is DISCRIMINATORY .
We are in a minority by having foreign partners, the majority of people, mostly uneducated about this subject, will only see what is in the newspapers and think that all the problems are caused by immigration, therefore, you will never get mass support to stop this change happening.
If you look at some of the other e-petitions you will see that 135,739 want to stop the population increasing to 70 million, 10,130 want to stop mass migration and 1,354 want to stop all immigration into the UK.
As it has been mentioned before, that the government do not have a great success rate when bringing in some new changes and it has been quoted that the Institute for Public Policy Research warned that if the Government accepted the proposals and went ahead with the policy, ‘it is likely to be challenged in the courts’.
Someone from Taiwan once said, don't listen to what the (Mainland) Chinese government says - watch what they do.
In public they are all guns blazing about Taiwan, military exercises, threats of invasion etc.
In reality, but they don't shout about it, they've opened more direct air routes, opened trade agreements, sent them pandas etc.
The conclusion is that China doesn't really hate Taiwan, but either secretly wants the status quo, or wants peaceful reunion.
Same applies to this government. David Cameron might pretend to be a tory, but is really a liberal. It's not the first time - Edward Heath was the same, and Tony Blair was almost the same, except he at least was honest about being a closet tory.
David Cameron, one thing he is not, is someone's fool. Take this proposal, in public you can imagine he will be for it, as cutting down immigration is something the public likes. In private I would guess he would be thinking it's a good idea, but probably the wrong answer to the problem. In reality - well, as I said before, governments are not stupid. I have experience of local government (Don't ask - really, just don't ask!) and just about every time, if your local council makes an unpopular decision, it's because they're between a rock and a hard place. That housing development - if they turn it down, it will go to appeal, the council will lose, it will be taxpayers money.
If there is a good chance this immigration change would go to court, and the decision would go against the government, then they just won't implement it...........yet.
I am not a lawyer, but even I can see holes you could drive a coach, horses, and a team bus full of cheerleaders through on this one.
About the only thing it has going for it, is that it will be mildly popular with some voters, who see abuses of the current system, by...we all know who.
Even this, many of the anti immigration voters won't have even thought of this idea, as they get it from the media and hear more of the so called bogus asylum seekers.
Putting aside every bit of personal interest I may have in if this law is passed or not - looking at this logically, it just doesn't seem like something the government could make stick.
As I said though, be interesting to see what happens if they do.
Last edited by Iani; 14th January 2012 at 13:36. Reason: I can't spell
I probably won't make any friends saying this...but
I disagree and cannot sign the petition.
Looking at this objectively and not personally - something has to be done about the ever increasing population of the UK, the increasing cost to funded education, health & benefits and impact on infrastructure such as lack of housing.
The petition states "This policy would privilege wealthy applicants, while discriminating against low-income/unemployed UK citizens. These proposals set out to challenge Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by making wealth a priority over love and the respect for family life."
Yes, it could be argued that way.. and be manipulated and abused all too easily.It could also be argued that we all have a human right to live wherever we like.
So What would a reasonable alternative be? I don't think it is the intention to discriminate in favour of the wealthy or higher than average earner, but simply to try and effect their ruling that "Settlement applicants must demonstrate they meet all of the immigration rules including that they can be maintained and accommodated without recourse to public funds".
I cannot see an alternative workable solution.
To play devil's advocate: I would also say let's face it, a salary of £25,700 (the higher proposed wage limit) for a family household is not a high income and by no means guarantees an immigrant will not make a claim on some kind of state funded provision.
I also agree with Graham, it is discriminatory, one size fits all. Having said that... any policy that is brought in will discriminate against some group.
I really do appreciate the proposals are causing worry and concern to members and hope that if brought in they do not impact on your own circumstances too greatly. I too am hoping that my partner will get a visit visa within the next couple of months and if that goes well, later a fiancee or spousal visa. But I still feel that some kind of restriction needs to be effected.
Personally, I think that MAC (Migration Advisory Committee) looks in the wrong direction and something has to be done about the numbers of eastern EU migrants. However non EU applications are an easier target.
A couple of interesting documents I have come across are:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14668726
"and that's why this plentiful of supply of cheap and mobile Eastern European labour is a headache for ministers. Their continued arrival, combined with the current falls in the numbers of all people emigrating, mean the government has to look elsewhere to hit the net migration target".
http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd...ions_aug11.pdf an excerpt of which is:
NINo (National Insirance Number) registrations to adult overseas nationals entering the UK, top 20 countries for 2010/11
Rank* Country Total (thousands) % Difference to 2009/10
1▲ Poland 81.18 16%
2▼ India 74.41 -1%
3▲ Pakistan 41.24 80%
4▼ Republic of Lithuania 40.84 74%
5▼ Republic of Latvia 27.26 18%
6▲ Spain 24.37 85%
7▲ France 22.55 37%
8▲ Italy 22.10 53%
9▼ Romania 22.00 24%
10▼ Nigeria 17.84 10%
11▲ China Peoples Republic 17.12 42%
12▲ Republic of Ireland 16.13 56%
13▼ Australia 15.85 18%
14▲ Hungary 15.65 36%
15▲ Sri Lanka 14.18 80%
16▼ Bulgaria 13.94 11%
17▲ Portugal 13.88 41%
18▼ Bangladesh 13.84 -35%
19▼ Germany 13.24 25%
20▼ Slovak Republic 11.67 -12%
Last edited by DeltaRomeo; 14th January 2012 at 13:56. Reason: grammar
I have a gut feeling that when April comes around, there will be changes, but not all in one go. Possibly in small increments, so that those that are applying soon after April will not feel the brunt of the governments intentions.....
Thanks for the constructive responses above.
I am basically 'anti-immigration', as I suspect are the majority of the population of this country.
I also agree that over-population is becoming a major problem both in this country and throughout the world.
Personally I have only produced one offspring, so I've tried to keep my personal expansion to a minimum.
It is the poor focussing of this type of proposed legislation that is infuriating. The government KNOW where the 'problem' immigrants are coming from, and I'm pretty damned certain that doesn't include many on visas from the Philippines. Result, a scatter-gun approach which is bound to create hardship and resentment.
Spouses are permitted to WORK, so the income side of things is still a red herring.
Just disallow benefits for a minimum of 5 years to anyone coming into the country from outside the EU (even better coming from the EU too, but we know that isn't going to happen)
Simple.
im in agreement with you there, thats a sensible and workable solutionThanks for the constructive responses above.
I am basically 'anti-immigration', as I suspect are the majority of the population of this country.
I also agree that over-population is becoming a major problem both in this country and throughout the world.
Personally I have only produced one offspring, so I've tried to keep my personal expansion to a minimum.
It is the poor focussing of this type of proposed legislation that is infuriating. The government KNOW where the 'problem' immigrants are coming from, and I'm pretty damned certain that doesn't include many on visas from the Philippines. Result, a scatter-gun approach which is bound to create hardship and resentment.
Spouses are permitted to WORK, so the income side of things is still a red herring.
Just disallow benefits for a minimum of 5 years to anyone coming into the country from outside the EU (even better coming from the EU too, but we know that isn't going to happen)
Simple.
your in the wrong job
Well I DID used to work for the Unemployment Benefit Office...as it was called then.im in agreement with you there, thats a sensible and workable solution
your in the wrong job
Having been self-employed and generating my own income for at least 30 years also gives me a slightly different perspective on society's parasites.
Yes point taken 'imagine', I apologise for any insult, although I stand by my comment.. for someone wishing to support a spouse and / or family from abroad I do not think it unreasonable to suggest a minimum salary, whatever the amount - it is designed to alleviate the drain on the state.
I would add that yes.. I do know the real world and am painfully familiar with poverty and hardship, I raised my eldest 2 children from babies to adulthood as a single parent, so I am aware of the struggle. I wouldn't have considered a relationship when I was living in those circumstances though.
i been there myself single dad to 3 young daughters, and didnt consider a relationship while i was bringing them up,
but to the point it sounds like you think under £25,700 is living in poverty
I think the idea of "no benefits for x number of years" is not only a good idea, but would be an awful lot easier than this other suggestion.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple - allegedly.
So maybe the idea has some merits, but I can still see this is full of holes. Oh well, time will tell
come on Deltaromeo what kind of real world are you from,
how many people get that kind of wage in a year , iv never seen it in my life or any friends i know, unless there working offshore , not a high income indeed, give me a job at that wageTo play devil's advocate: I would also say let's face it, a salary of £25,700 (the higher proposed wage limit) for a family household is not a high income ,
That is actually already part of the proposals.
Instead of 2 years in UK as spouse before ILR (and able to claim benefits) it is proposed to be 5 years before ILR.
Has anyone actually taken time to read the proposals and the MAC report.
That's where I got the 5 years from.
It's mainly the income level that I'm moaning about.
So if I ILR is set at 5 years, what happens when the 2 year Spouse visa expires? FLR for those on a Spouse visa?
Come on for heavens sake you cant put a price on genuine true love & the right to a family life whatever figures are being quoted is totally out of order imo
Deltaromeo you say you wouldnt of considered a relationship if you were in those circumstances but surely love conquers all whatever the circumstances are if anyone trully loves there partner they will move heaven & earth to make a family life with them i know i certainly did
Nah DeltaRomeo, no "insult" is taken, and anyway, you're from Oxfordshire? Good chance there are more opportunities for higher wages around there, but in my area, it would be the exception rather than the norm.
However, the cost of living here is way cheaper than in the London area. Yes food is the same price wherever, but accommodation, both to buy and rent - odds on we have more disposable incomes around here than many in London and the Home Counties.
To have the same standard of living I have here, I think I'd have to double my wage, AND be prepared to commute for a long time.
We have the most incredible countryside in walking distance, great schools, weirdly perhaps people talk to each other as neighbours - but less "cultural" stuff, and it's definitely more grey and cold.
Put it this way, I keep thinking of relocating, but there are plus and minus points.
Rambling on huh
No of course I agree, there is no price that can be put on Love. But back then.. I wouldn't have been in a position to have met or considered meeting someone from so far away.
Not from here, but moved 3 years ago for the job I'm in now lol
Of course not, that isn't what I suggested, living hand to mouth, not knowing how to clothe, feed or keep your children warm is what I know as living in poverty.
But guys, for goodness sake, I'm not attacking anyone, I'm not trying to demean or be unsympathetic. I do feel though that some measure of control be brought in. Yes, I see that no one here wishes to abuse the system, but unfortunately there are those out there that will and do. So the proposed (and they are only proposed) reforms to migration aims to curtail the freeloaders and abusers but it is impossible to say.. ok you can come in .. but he can't on such a large scale.
As Terpe points out, the reports are published and available to read... they are not unreasonable - in my opinion.
.
I really have to disagree i find putting any financial ruling on having your legally married wife live with you in the uk is totally unaceptable & disrespecfullAs Terpe points out, the reports are published and available to read... they are not unreasonable - in my opinion.
Also what gets me wound up & annoyed is the fact if your born & bred in the uk have paid in to the tax coffers all your working life this counts for nothing your wife can still not join you here in the uk because you earnings are below the threshold
In the past Royalty have of course been happy to import their partners...though they'd probably have passed the income test.I really have to disagree i find putting any financial ruling on having your legally married wife live with you in the uk is totally unaceptable & disrespecfull
Also what gets me wound up & annoyed is the fact if your born & bred in the uk have paid in to the tax coffers all your working life this counts for nothing your wife can still not join you here in the uk because you earnings are below the threshold
We could put another spin on it,view it from a different angle,if I truly,hark that word,TRULY loved someone and she couldnt come here,well if the mountain wont come to mohammed............
Sometimes you're flush and sometimes you're bust, and when you're up, it's never as good as it seems, and when you're down, you never think you'll be up again. But life goes on.
The beauty of a woman is not in the clothes she wears, the figure that she carries, or the way she combs her hair. The beauty of a woman is seen in her eyes, because that is the doorway to her heart, the place where love resides. True beauty in a woman is reflected in her soul. It's the passion that she shows to the outside world.
Sounds nice to be able to just up sticks & move to the phils but lets face facts if you in the eyes of the goverment are unable to support your spouse here in the uk how can you support her & yourself & other family members in the phils when you have to leave your employment here in the uk. With no job prospects in the phils & limited savings in my eyes you would not be able too stay to long in the phils before having to return home to the uk due to a shortfall in finances.We could put another spin on it,view it from a different angle,if I truly,hark that word,TRULY loved someone and she couldnt come here,well if the mountain wont come to mohammed............
...We could put another spin on it,view it from a different angle,if I truly,hark that word,TRULY loved someone and she couldnt come here,well if the mountain wont come to mohammed............- TOTALLY impracticable for at least TWO reasons that immediately spring to mind:
1. T'would inevitably mean starting from scratch. You'd need to be resourceful workwise. Okay, I KNOW you've "been there ... done that ... worn the 'T'~shirt et al"! But not everyone has your tenacity in that respect. Jobs might well "grow on trees" - if you're prepared to do constant hard graft on a banana or coconut plantation
2. Probably even more importantly ... there would be no NHS to fall back on should you be stricken by any of all manner of illnesses.
IMO ... FAR from ideal!
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
