Uk Settlement Visa

[chiang mai]

Many Brits will agree the need for changes to the UK immigration system and will be aware that changes are in the pipeline, exactly what those changes will include however might hold some surprises. The following newspaper extract talks about the need for Sponsors to have a minimum level of income which is currently thought might be too low, the implications of this statement seem to be that if you don't earn above a certain level you cannot sponsor an immigrant as your foreign bride and both live in the UK! So I wonder what other Brits make of this situation, is it fair and will it work?

"But we need to make sure - for their sake as well as ours - that those who come through this route are genuinely coming for family reasons, that they can speak English, and that they have the resources they need to live here and make a contribution here - not just to scrape by, or worse, to subsist on benefit.

"A sample of more than 500 family migration cases found that over 70% of UK-based sponsors had post-tax earnings of less than £20,000 a year. When the income level of the sponsor is this low, there is an obvious risk that the migrants and their family will become a significant burden on the welfare system and the taxpayer.

"So we have asked the Migration Advisory Committee to look at the case for increasing the minimum level for appropriate maintenance.

Mr Cameron wants to stop sham marriages by extending the time it takes for migrants to qualify for a spousal visa".

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23996209-pm-to-unveil-immigration-crackdown.do

[Guest jonzboy]

Just watched Cameron's speech on Sky.

Apart from indicating that £20K after tax income is not enough, he also mentioned that scrutiny of family visa applicants' relationships will be stepped up as well as making it harder for applicants to achieve citizenship by having to show greater contributions towards society and by extending the LITUK test to the whole text of the book (bringing in the chapters on history and culture).

Full text of this speech is not yet posted at the number 10 website, and the UKBA site is now swamped it seems as I can't get anything.

[chiang mai]

The coin hasn't dropped yet for the majority of British ex-pats that what this means is that they will not be able to sponsor their Thai wife to join them in the UK, unless they are earning an average salary or better, which means GBP31k or more.

As for extending the LITUK test: I wish the government would just have the balls to drop all the pretense and say outright that they simply don't want partners from certain countries rather than subject people to a system of testing wherein they are almost certainly bound to fail.

[7by7]

As for extending the LITUK test: I wish the government would just have the balls to drop all the pretense and say outright that they simply don't want partners from certain countries rather than subject people to a system of testing wherein they are almost certainly bound to fail.

The requirement applies to all those applying for ILR, with certain exemptions. EEA nationals and their non-EEA national family members do not apply for ILR, of course, and do not have to satisfy the requirement when/if they apply for permanent residence.

However, most of those who were exempt when applying for ILR plus EEA nationals and their non-EEA family members do have to satisfy the requirement if they want to become British citizens.

So, are you saying that the government doesn't want partners from any non-English speaking country outside the EEA to settle on the UK? Surely not!

Bound to fail? Not the experience of people I know personally and the vast majority of those who post on boards such as this. If you can speak English sufficiently well then the course materials and test are very easy; it just requires a little application and work. If your English isn't good enough, there's the ESOL with citizenship course route.

As for the rest, this is nothing new; see UK Government Launches Consultation On Family Migration.

Unfortunately, the consultation closed on 9th September, so it's too late to make your feelings known if you did not take part whilst it was open.

[chewy22]

If this is true about the 31k required to give an after tax income of 20k then I suspect many applicants will fail if this is passed. Average income is around 25k in this country UK before tax.

This does not take into account your disposable income. These 70% of cases could indeed be living very well on or below this amount. This is an unfair barrier, or is it just an easy way of cutting off future applicants.

[chiang mai]

As for extending the LITUK test: I wish the government would just have the balls to drop all the pretense and say outright that they simply don't want partners from certain countries rather than subject people to a system of testing wherein they are almost certainly bound to fail.

The requirement applies to all those applying for ILR, with certain exemptions. EEA nationals and their non-EEA national family members do not apply for ILR, of course, and do not have to satisfy the requirement when/if they apply for permanent residence.

However, most of those who were exempt when applying for ILR plus EEA nationals and their non-EEA family members do have to satisfy the requirement if they want to become British citizens.

So, are you saying that the government doesn't want partners from any non-English speaking country outside the EEA to settle on the UK? Surely not!

Bound to fail? Not the experience of people I know personally and the vast majority of those who post on boards such as this. If you can speak English sufficiently well then the course materials and test are very easy; it just requires a little application and work. If your English isn't good enough, there's the ESOL with citizenship course route.

As for the rest, this is nothing new; see UK Government Launches Consultation On Family Migration.

Unfortunately, the consultation closed on 9th September, so it's too late to make your feelings known if you did not take part whilst it was open.

Given a choice I am absolutely certain that the UK government would only allow spouse visa's for spouses from English speaking countries where the spouse was a higher earner with a need skill or training, everyone else represents an overhead and a risk of some sort to the government!

The LITUK bar is set too high, it's a test that a large majority of UK school leavers would fail and a majority of UK citizens would have serious difficulty with, without some serious cramming beforehand. Why set a bar for immigrants at a level that is far higher than the bar for resident nationals, unless there's another agenda. Also, statistics presented on this site have shown that the LITUK test favors countries where residents are taught in English, in this respect the great British experiment under Labor to emulate the American melting pot concept of a a fully integrated multicultural society has failed horribly. It will be at least a decade before the British as a whole will once again be able to embrace the concept that an integrated multicultural UK is a positive thing. Sorry, but I'm absolutely certain that the British population as a whole is racist and bigoted and LITUK does nothing more than to demonstrate that.

[chiang mai]

If this is true about the 31k required to give an after tax income of 20k then I suspect many applicants will fail if this is passed. Average income is around 25k in this country UK before tax.

This does not take into account your disposable income. These 70% of cases could indeed be living very well on or below this amount. This is an unfair barrier, or is it just an easy way of cutting off future applicants.

I believe the average UK salary before tax is circa GBP 31k hence my statement is based on that so yes, it's both an unfair barrier and it's an easy way to cut off future applicants.

[bangkockney]

The data shows that the median annual salary for all full-time employees in 2010 was £25,900, which is up 0.3% on the year before. But men earn vastly more than women: £28,091, compared to £22,490 - a difference of 19.9%.

From the ONS.

[chiang mai]

The data shows that the median annual salary for all full-time employees in 2010 was £25,900, which is up 0.3% on the year before. But men earn vastly more than women: £28,091, compared to £22,490 - a difference of 19.9%.

From the ONS.

[7by7]

Given a choice I am absolutely certain that the UK government would only allow spouse visa's for spouses from English speaking countries where the spouse was a higher earner with a need skill or training, everyone else represents an overhead and a risk of some sort to the government!

Rubbish, IMHO.

The LITUK bar is set too high, it's a test that a large majority of UK school leavers would fail and a majority of UK citizens would have serious difficulty with, without some serious cramming beforehand.

If this is true, it is a sad indictment of the standard of education in this country nowadays; not of the test.

Why set a bar for immigrants at a level that is far higher than the bar for resident nationals, unless there's another agenda.

Don't understand. Last time I looked British nationals had the right to live in the UK without any bar?????

Also, statistics presented on this site have shown that the LITUK test favors countries where residents are taught in English in this respect the great British experiment under Labor to emulate the American melting pot concept of a a fully integrated multicultural society has failed horribly.

What statistics? Where on this site?

You seem to be forgetting that the current government is only continuing where Labour left off.

It was Labour that increased the qualifying time for ILR from 12 months to 24.

It was Labour that introduced extortionate charges FLR, ILR etc., which were free under the previous Tory government, and the annual above inflation increases in these and other visa fees.

It was Labour that introduced the Knowledge of Life and Language in the UK requirement.

The A1 English requirement was a Labour idea which the new government continued with after the election.

If you think the USA is a fully integrated multicultural society, then you are very much mistaken.

[bangkockney]

For those interested here's a link to the report quoted by Mr Cameron. Do read it, there's some quite interesting stuff, though the sample size is quite small (533).

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/occ94/occ94?view=Binary

[chiang mai]

Given a choice I am absolutely certain that the UK government would only allow spouse visa's for spouses from English speaking countries where the spouse was a higher earner with a need skill or training, everyone else represents an overhead and a risk of some sort to the government!

Rubbish, IMHO.

We can agree to disagree on this point.

The LITUK bar is set too high, it's a test that a large majority of UK school leavers would fail and a majority of UK citizens would have serious difficulty with, without some serious cramming beforehand.

If this is true, it is a sad indictment of the standard of education in this country nowadays; not of the test.

I think this can be regarded as fact and that comments in this forum from posters will bear that out. There was a newspaper article on this subject a short while ago where it was found that two thirds of school leavers believed Churchill was an insurance company mascot vs a war time PM, says it all!

Why set a bar for immigrants at a level that is far higher than the bar for resident nationals, unless there's another agenda.

Don't understand. Last time I looked British nationals had the right to live in the UK without any bar?????

A cute answer but I think you are aware that we're talking about the levels of knowledge required/taught from both groups, citizens vs immigrants.

Also, statistics presented on this site have shown that the LITUK test favors countries where residents are taught in English in this respect the great British experiment under Labor to emulate the American melting pot concept of a a fully integrated multicultural society has failed horribly.

What statistics? Where on this site?

I feel sure you remember the debate where this was discussed but I will nevertheless search for it!

You seem to be forgetting that the current government is only continuing where Labour left off.

It was Labour that increased the qualifying time for ILR from 12 months to 24.

It was Labour that introduced extortionate charges FLR, ILR etc., which were free under the previous Tory government, and the annual above inflation increases in these and other visa fees.

It was Labour that introduced the Knowledge of Life and Language in the UK requirement.

The A1 English requirement was a Labour idea which the new government continued with after the election.

I don't understand all the discussion about Labor this and that, surely that's the UK government is it not! Whilst I'm no fan of Labor I fail to see the relevance of your comments to a UK centric argument.

If you think the USA is a fully integrated multicultural society, then you are very much mistaken.

My experience of having lived there for thirteen years is different yours perhaps, my take is that the US has done and continues to do an excellent job in this respect although doubtless there will be major areas of exception, especially in recent years and where certain countries are concerned.

Apologies for not being inclined to screw around with and adapt the multi-quote system of quotes.

Edited October 11, 2011 by chiang mai

[chewy22]

As we know 25k is the average income before tax, but we are missing the point if as posted 70% of the sample taken of 500 applicants for sponsoring partners and family had incomes lower than this, then 7 out of 10 would fail the possibility of these new rules.

If I have read correct it is about 40,000 a year spouse visas so about 28,000 could be rejected.

Chaing mai makes some very valid points about the life in the uk test. I employ people and I ask them the odd question from the test only to be given a blank look.

[chiang mai]

I note 7B7 that you agree with my earlier comment but it's unclear whether you think it's a function of the education system or the test, or both, I continue to maintain it's primarily the test:

"You are correct in saying that very few British people could pass the Life in the UK test".

(post number 2)

[7by7]

Two points.

It is you who brought Labour into the argument, "the great British experiment under Labor to emulate the American melting pot concept of a a fully integrated multicultural society.........." you said. I merely pointed out that it was Labour who started to make family immigration more difficult and more expensive.

If you are going to quote me, and by all means do, kindly don't edit what I posted. What I actually said was "You are correct in saying that very few British people could pass the Life in the UK test, to which I would add a very important phrase: without any study."

[chiang mai]

Two points.

It is you who brought Labour into the argument, "the great British experiment under Labor to emulate the American melting pot concept of a a fully integrated multicultural society.........." you said. I merely pointed out that it was Labour who started to make family immigration more difficult and more expensive.

If you are going to quote me, and by all means do, kindly don't edit what I posted. What I actually said was "You are correct in saying that very few British people could pass the Life in the UK test, to which I would add a very important phrase: without any study."

Ah, understood, the Labor reference however was just that, a reference to a point in time that could be identified and was not intended to be a political biased in any way.

[7by7]

Understood.

BTW, I still don't understand your point about British citizens, or resident nationals as you call them.

Also, when you say "There was a newspaper article on this subject a short while ago where it was found that two thirds of school leavers believed Churchill was an insurance company mascot vs a war time PM, says it all!" you seem to be agreeing with me that the fact that many British citizens would have difficulty in passing the LitUK test, without further study, is indeed a sad indictment of the standard of education in the UK!

IMHO, it is not wrong that immigrants have to learn this stuff; what's wrong is that British schoolchildren don't!

[knortyboy]

IMHO, it is not wrong that immigrants have to learn this stuff; what's wrong is that British schoolchildren don't!

Well said that man.