Wow

[BoholoX]

Taken from glucose's thread, I for one am stunned. If correct then it's no wonder its so freakin difficult to legitimately get my wife and son back to the UK.

some 8,579,378 Filipinos living and working overseas including an estimate of 200, 987 Filipinos in the UK. Of this number in the UK the commission estimated that over 100,000 were irregular migrants defined as those not properly documented or without valid residence or work permits or who are overstaying in the foreign country

[joebloggs]

3rd time i've changed my reply.

i can't believe out of the 200,000 Filipinos in the UK, 100,000 have overstayed. many have come on spouse or fiancee visa's, my wife knows many Filipinos who work in care homes and for the NHS, i doubt they are over-stayers.

so where are these 100,000 hiding

just made a new thread about Illegals in the USA, and

India with 240,000 illegal immigrants ranks seventh in the list which is topped by Mexico with 6.8 million followed by El Salvador (660,000), Guatemala (520,000) and Honduras (380,000).

China is placed fifth in the list, but tops among the Asian countries with 280,000 illegal immigrants, followed by Philippines (270,000) which is ranked overall sixth.

India is followed by 230,000 illegal immigrants from Korea, Ecuador (210,000) and Vietnam (170,000).

[KeithD]

200,000 Is quite a large chunk of the population, about 0.3%, especially as the UK is not one of the main countries Filipino's try to get into. The last official figure I seen 4-5 years ago from the government was around 110,000 which would seem on a par with other Asian immigrants. In the 2001 census 40,000 lived here.

As the influx of Filipino's has dropped over the last few years since the jobs dried up, then the figures will only be increasing slowly.

The 200,000+ figure comes from a Manila Times journalist, and not an official source.

[Terpe]

Taken from glucose's thread, I for one am stunned. If correct then it's no wonder its so freakin difficult to legitimately get my wife and son back to the UK.

some 8,579,378 Filipinos living and working overseas including an estimate of 200, 987 Filipinos in the UK. Of this number in the UK the commission estimated that over 100,000 were irregular migrants defined as those not properly documented or without valid residence or work permits or who are overstaying in the foreign country

Personally I highly doubt the numbers stated.
I'm also highly surprised that any ECO would actually use such unsubstantiated statistics as an argument in a visit visa refusal letter.

According to the UK Office for National Statistics (published Feb 2012) the population of UK residents born in the Philippines was 124,000 (between July 2010 to June 2011)
Philippines was Ranked number 16

This number would also include the 10,840 Filipinos who gained British citizenship in 2007 alone. This was the second largest number of any nation, after India, and compares to only 1,385 in 2001.

From a completely different source here is a 2009 estimate by Commission on Filipinos Overseas


Looking at line 145 (United Kingdom) it states:-

Permanent= 91,852
Temporary= 99,135
Irregular= 10,000
Total= 200,987


The definitions are:-
Permanent - Immigrants or legal permanent residents abroad whose stay do not
depend on work contracts.
Temporary - Persons whose stay overseas is employment related, and who are
expected to return at the end of their work contracts.
Irregular - Those not properly documented or without valid residence or work permits,
or who are overstaying in a foreign country.

There's nothing in the statistics that comes anywhere close to 100,000 illegals/undocumented.

Any ECO who would state such wild statistics could face serious consequences if challenged.

[joebloggs]

first time i've seen a refusal letter stating 'statistics' and with some recent bizarre refusals, makes me wonder whats going on at the embassy

[Arthur Little]

There are lies ... damned lies ... and statistics ...

[Terpe]

first time i've seen a refusal letter stating 'statistics' and with some recent bizarre refusals, makes me wonder whats going on at the embassy

If I'm feeling generous I would say must be a typo, but still, using stastistics in that way needs to be challenged. It is far outside the grade of ECO.

Officer level is simply not a high level at all within the civil service. Period.

No offence

[Arthur Little]

using stastistics in that way needs to be challenged.

Yes ... !

Officer level is simply not a high level at all within the civil service. Period.

No offence

... none taken ... as a former "penpusher" in Social Services, I was the "lowest of the low" in the pecking order. So I realise you were merely being 'civil'.