Labour to scrap minimum income requirement for foreign spouses

[HauptmannUK]

10 hours ago, darren1971 said:

From what I gather it seems like you are blaming lack of investment in technology on immigration? you also seem to be slightly racist which is a very British trait.

I am blaming lack of investment in technology and low productivity on a low-added-value labour market with weak employment legislation and weak enforcement on employers. That draws in immigrants. I am quite convinced that most immigrants are not 'highly skilled' but low- or unskilled and working at or near minimum wage. Giving employers access to a huge pool of low/no-skill cheap labour has distorted the employment market and had negative repercussions for capital investment.

The 'racist' comment is an easy insult. I am not racist. I have East European family and I am married to a Thai lady who has suffered a couple of racist incidents - so I am all too aware of the unpleasantness of racism. I have also spent much of my life travelling and working overseas - being the 'foreigner'. In the process learning a few foreign languages.

Britain is a VERY racially tolerant society compared to most other countries. My friend, you should spend a year living in France (as I have done), see how they treat their non-white citizens - or check out the US for that matter!

[HauptmannUK]

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

HauptmannUK, what has your rant above got to do with this topic; which is about the financial requirement for family members of British citizens applying for settlement under Appendix FM of the immigration rules?

 

Nothing.

 

Odd that someone who is so against EU migration chooses a German word as his forum handle!

7by7, the connection between my post and the financial requirement is that in an effort to reduce immigration the government will take the easy option and increase the F.R. rather than restrict EU (in reality Eastern European) immigration.   I don't agree with the FR as it stands, reverting back to the 'old' regulation is probably fairest.

It also galls me that my wife is working (paying tax and NI) yet we have to pay the NHS surcharge on top....

 

As to me being 'so against EU migration' - I am not specifically against EU migration - and I think some migration is desirable - however I am against any form of uncontrolled migration. There are areas of the UK where uncontrolled EU migration has had a major negative impact on living standards and quality of life.  By and large it has not impacted the affluent classes. They don't live in the areas where most of the immigrants live so they are not competing for accommodation and they can still get a GP appointment in under three weeks. They work in occupations where there are significant 'entry thresholds' - so their jobs are not threatened. Against this background they are happy to look down on those affected, like some sort of 'moral giraffe', and tell the little people that they are racist or stupid.

This attitude is what has taken us to Brexit, which I believe will seriously damage the economy, and will result in a disproportionate crackdown on non-EU immigration that will break up relationships and families.

[penco]

I think you local constituency association is massaging the figures somewhat!

[...]

Fantastic post. Informative and factual.

Thank you.

[penco]

An interesting opinion piece on this very topic...

 

The UK, where falling in love with a foreigner is only for the better off

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2017/feb/23/the-uk-where-falling-in-love-with-a-foreigner-is-only-for-the-better-off?

 

I noted they didn't mention the exorbitant cost of the many visas needed to bring a spouse here and stay here.

 

I was chatting to a colleague and his spouse who is from New Zealand and she was saying how shocked she was at the cost of the applications for Settlement/FLR/ILR etc.

 

 

 

 

[7by7]

13 hours ago, HauptmannUK said:

7by7, the connection between my post and the financial requirement is that in an effort to reduce immigration the government will take the easy option and increase the F.R. rather than restrict EU (in reality Eastern European) immigration.   I don't agree with the FR as it stands, reverting back to the 'old' regulation is probably fairest.................

 I agree with you that the pre July 2012 financial requirement is probably the fairest, and most logical, way of assessing the ability of British citizens to adequately support their immigrant family members.

 

I also agree that making non EU family immigration more difficult is easier for the government than restricting EU/EEA immigration.

 

For the simple reason that, until Brexit, the government is bound by the FoM directive. What happens after Brexit, we shall have to wait and see.

 

However, your phrase "EU (in reality Eastern European) immigration" is incorrect.

 

Poles are the largest single group; but the Irish are second. Indeed, of the top ten nationalities only 4 are Eastern European. (source)

 

But I repeat: this topic is about the financial requirement for family members of British citizens applying for settlement under Appendix FM of the immigration rules, not EU/EEA freedom of movement.

 

If you wish to discuss that elsewhere, I will be happy to join in.

[darren1971]

On 2017-6-2 at 8:09 PM, HauptmannUK said:

I am blaming lack of investment in technology and low productivity on a low-added-value labour market with weak employment legislation and weak enforcement on employers. That draws in immigrants. I am quite convinced that most immigrants are not 'highly skilled' but low- or unskilled and working at or near minimum wage. Giving employers access to a huge pool of low/no-skill cheap labour has distorted the employment market and had negative repercussions for capital investment.

The 'racist' comment is an easy insult. I am not racist. I have East European family and I am married to a Thai lady who has suffered a couple of racist incidents - so I am all too aware of the unpleasantness of racism. I have also spent much of my life travelling and working overseas - being the 'foreigner'. In the process learning a few foreign languages.

Britain is a VERY racially tolerant society compared to most other countries. My friend, you should spend a year living in France (as I have done), see how they treat their non-white citizens - or check out the US for that matter!

Whenever I make a post I always try my best to make it relevant to the topic/question from the O.P... We are talking about UK citizens bringing their married partners and or children to live with them in the UK.

 

[darren1971]

On 2017-6-2 at 0:54 PM, 7by7 said:

Or logic.

 

In which case, why is the income support amount just £6195.40 p.a. plus housing costs? If a British couple are expected to survive on that, why does the government insist a couple where one is an immigrant need so much more?

 

This financial requirement is not only unfair, it is absurd because it takes absolutely no account of outgoings.

 

For example:-

 

Mr A has an income of £18,599 p.a. he owns his own house and his mortgage is paid of. He does not meet the requirement.

 

Mr. B lives in the same town as Mr. A. He has an income of £18,600 p.a. He has mortgage repayments of £7,200p.a. and is also paying off a bank loan at £1200 p.a. He does meet the requirement.

 

Who is better able to support their partner? Obvioulsy Mr. A; but he fails the requirement!

totally agree, the current system is not a fair system.

[dbrenn]

The Conservatives are talking in their manifesto about increasing the financial requirement still further. As a lifelong Conservative, it's enough to make me want to vote Labour, except that I can't because the Conservatives have yet to keep their last manifesto promise to give expatriates their vote back.

 

Politicians are the most disgraceful liars, the lot of them.

[Trevor1809]

If we are debating fairness, all businesses are up in arms now that the pool of East European workers is about to dry up and they are campaigning to allow East European migrants to come here to work on minimum wage. Yet the £18600 is up somewhat on the minimum wage and there are the visa fees and the English tests. Where is the fairness in that.

Also the pro immigration lobby bang on about the positive aspects of immigration until the immigrant is the spouse of British citizen.

So a non EU health worker is keeping the NHS afloat but my theatre nurse on a spousal visa should be excluded if at all possible because we dont want those nasty spousal immigrants do we.

Given that Labour would be a complete disaster faced with prospect of being forced to chose between living apart from my wife or being forced to live in Thailand I think I might vote for the UK to go down the pan. I was quite prepared to stay in the EU until the Conservatives well an truly screwed that up so the UK is half way there already.

[Trevor1809]

Well now we now. Difficult to know which was the most mind numbingly stupid thing to do, hold the referendum or the election.

Now will the Conservatives be so deep into face saving and struggling with Brexit will they leave immigration of partners of non EU immigrants alone or will they out of spite and to be seen to be doing something that is easy to do and earn a lot of brownie points go all out for non EU partners. Good news that Amber Rudd nearly didn't make it.