Naturalisation eligibility to be increased to ILR+2 years???

[shabrawy]

Hi everyone I'd like an advice about eligibility for naturalisation:
One of my relatives he is already 67yrs now, he had a ILR since about 11 years (as he worked in UK for 4yrs at that time), however, once he got the ILR he left the country to live abroad and he was only coming every year (sometimes 2years) every time for 3-4 weaks.

is he eligible for naturalisation?
and if not what does he need to do to be eligible??

Thank you

[dnicky]

One rule that applies in the year leading to naturalization after getting ILR is that, one can stay out of UK no more than 90 days.
I reckon your relative would have to be resident in the UK continuously atleast for 9 months out of a year preceeding his/her naturalization application.
Besides I am not sure whether not continuously staying in the UK upon getting ILR 11 years ago would have any adverse impact on the naturalization application, as one of the requirement of naturalization applicaiton is the intent of making UK one's permanant country of residence.

[Cosmopol]

Hi everyone I'd like an advice about eligibility for naturalisation:
One of my relatives he is already 67yrs now, he had a ILR since about 11 years (as he worked in UK for 4yrs at that time), however, once he got the ILR he left the country to live abroad and he was only coming every year (sometimes 2years) every time for 3-4 weaks.

is he eligible for naturalisation?
and if not what does he need to do to be eligible??

Thank you

Please note that this topic deals with a differect subject.
However - to your question - no, he wouldn't be eligible, as the rules clearly state that one must not have been absent from the country for more than 90 days in the 12 months preceding the application (which is not fulfilled) and no more than 450 days in the 5 years preceding the application (also not fulfilled).

[sarah08]

So they've made it retrospective again.

Guys, could you kindly explain this part:
has had the permanent permission for the whole of the qualifying period
of the document http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... iew=Binary
page 15.

Also please have a look at the definition of 'qualifying period' on page 18. It's 8 years (or 6 years if you're a volunteer).

Does it mean that if you've got ILR and don't want to switch to "Probational Sitizenship" you will have you wait eigth additional years (or six) after you obtained your ILR before you are eligible for naturalization?

Yeh, guys, haven't you noticed this too? Having read it twice, I got the same impression as mona-de-bois's. Can anybody give a different explanation on this? Or we should just hope there is some sort of transitional provision for exisiting ILR holders?

Below is my written response sent to the HO re the bill (to both email addresses: homeaffcom@parliament.uk; and immigrationsimplification@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk).

Written Evidence:
Comments on draft immigration and citizenship bill

Dear Sirs,

I think the draft bill is faulty because it makes no reference to people who already have ILR and will be qualified for applying for citizenship soon (for example in one year's time). I myself will have met the current requirements for applying for citizenship by end of May 2009. What happens if the bill comes into effect before then and the rules change?

The bill should make it clear that it does not apply to people who will qualify for citizenship application in three years' time. There is a reason for the provision of three years. This is because it currently takes 6 years to qualify for citizenship application (ie 5 year for ILR and 1 more year after ILR). For people who have already on the path to settlement for 3 years, the law should not change "half-way"!

Recent court ruling on the immigration rule change on HSMP case (17 July 2008 Highly Skilled Migrant Programme Forum Judicial Review) against the Government means that the change of immigration rules must not have retrospective effects. Existing ILR holders have a reasonable expectation that they should be able to apply for citizenship one year after they have received their ILR. These people should not be negatively affected by the changes introduced in this bill! They have demonstrated that they have earned their ILR!

Especially, mind you, the negative impact of any immigration rule change that has retrospective effects can cause significant social uneasy and hardship. In one instance, this led to the above-mentioned Judicial Review in which the Government was criticised. Two websites, www.vbsi.org.uk (Voice of Britain's Skilled Immigrants) and HSMP Forum were setup specifically to fight against such changes. Therefore, a serious, detailed and extensive Impact Assessment should be carried out for the finalisation of the current draft bill so as to avoid repeating past mistakes.

I am looking forward to your reply.
Thank you!

>>>>>>> Is www.vbsi.org.uk still online?>>>>>

Hi Hidden Dragon, have you got a reply from HO?

[HMRB]

When does one have to start voluntary work? Is it after one has been granted probationary citizenship (which is after 5 years)? or do you show them voluntary work for the whole of 5 years?

[mrlookforward]

What)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

After having to wait an extra year on the Work Permit, paying increased fees and going through a whole load of stress, I might now have to wait an extra year before gaining citzenship? Ohh, it it'll cost me more. Not impressed.

As the HO often likes to remind us, Citizenship is not a right but a privilege

More on the proposed changes..I think this is getting beyond a joke now.. FFS, they are even talking about making immigrants collect points towards settlement as soon as they land in the UK(which would then probably go on the ID cards)!!! I wonder what Liam Byrne has been smoking???

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... isa119.xml

Will they let immigrants put their nectar points towards naturalisation point?

[Cosmopol]

Will they let immigrants put their nectar points towards naturalisation point?

Not allowed - that would discriminate against Tesco customers...

[republique]

Will they let immigrants put their nectar points towards naturalisation point?

Not allowed - that would discriminate against Tesco customers...

I like this concept
Why not Tesco points or Nectar, after all you can always exchange between the two of them?

[Plum70]

I have read all 10 pages of this thread and have one question that is open to speculation:

Under the future changes, the 3 steps to naturalisation as we've been told will be:

Temporary Residence
Probationary Citizenship
British Citizenship/Permanent Residence

Bearing in mind that the Green paper states that EU nationals will not be affected by the changes, does one cautiously assume that in the future an EU national (as well as their non-EEA family members) still automatically attains PR after 5 years?
From the above path, BC and PR seem to paired at par with each other (my interpretation may be wrong). If this is the case, then what is likely to be the next step for a EU national/non-EEA family member holding PR for 1 year?

[Cosmopol]

It would have to be explained in writing, but we can guess that "probationary citizenship" will probably replace PR / ILR and will effectively fall under the same rules, similar to HSMP being replaced by Tier 1 (General)...

[Plum70]

It would have to be explained in writing, but we can guess that "probationary citizenship" will probably replace PR / ILR and will effectively fall under the same rules, similar to HSMP being replaced by Tier 1 (General)...

I wonder if this would not be an infringement of EU law that provides EU/EEA citizens and their family members the right to permanent residency in any member state where they have resided in line with the regulations for 5 continuous years. Taken from the EU Directive/2004/38/EC:

17."Enjoyment of permanent residence by Union citizens who have chosen to settle long term in the host Member State would strengthen the feeling of Union citizenship and is a key element in promoting social cohesion, which is one of the fundamental objectives of the Union. A right of permanent residence should therefore be laid down for all Union citizens and their family members who have resided in the host Member State in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Directive during a continuous period of five years without becoming subject to an expulsion measure."
18. "In order to be a genuine vehicle for integration into the society of the host Member State in which the Union citizen resides, the right of permanent residence, once obtained, should not be subject to any conditions." Special conditions should only be applied where the same is true for citizens of the member state. (Bolding mine)
It does remain to be seen how the government will implement (or disregard) this aspect of the directive.

[petkanov]

The 5 year for permanent residence will not change for EU citizens. Eu citizens are handled in a different law, and the UK will not disregard this right. IF they disregard the directive, the ECJ will overturn it and anyway they will atomatically be considered permanent residents. I have a feeling that if permanent residence/citizenship is the final destination of the journey to earned citizenship, then EU citizens might be able to naturalize as soon as they become permanent residents after 5 year stay in the UK

[Cosmopol]

I wonder if this would not be an infringement of EU law that provides EU/EEA citizens and their family members the right to permanent residency in any member state where they have resided in line with the regulations for 5 continuous years. Taken from the EU Directive/2004/38/EC:

I only meant changes for the non-EU citizens, of course. How it would apply to EU nationals, is even more vague. It's probably senseless to speculate until we see some specific details revealed later on...

[Plum70]

I wonder if this would not be an infringement of EU law that provides EU/EEA citizens and their family members the right to permanent residency in any member state where they have resided in line with the regulations for 5 continuous years. Taken from the EU Directive/2004/38/EC:

I only meant changes for the non-EU citizens, of course. How it would apply to EU nationals, is even more vague. It's probably senseless to speculate until we see some specific details revealed later on...

I don't think it's senseless at all to speculate. The EU Directive is quite clear in this respect about what rights EU nationals and their family members obtain. It is either the UK govt abides by it or risks a court case.
We'll see about that soon.

[Cosmopol]

I don't think it's senseless at all to speculate. The EU Directive is quite clear in this respect about what rights EU nationals and their family members obtain. It is either the UK govt abides by it or risks a court case.
We'll see about that soon.

Once again, I meant the non-EU angle. Whatever regulation evolves, I don't think EU citizens have much to worry about - compared with non-EU ones...

[Plum70]

Once again, I meant the non-EU angle. Whatever regulation evolves, I don't think EU citizens have much to worry about - compared with non-EU ones...

I agree. But I am also referring to their non-EEA family members who may want to naturalise as BCs. It would be interesting to see how the new path would affect this.

[Plum70]

Citizenship Test Plans Published: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7829265.stm
Under the proposed new rules it appears that "the probationary citizenship rules do not apply to EU nationals (and their family members?) who have a right to live and work in the UK as part of the free market area".
(Italics mine)

[GoodFun]

It would have to be explained in writing, but we can guess that "probationary citizenship" will probably replace PR / ILR and will effectively fall under the same rules, similar to HSMP being replaced by Tier 1 (General)...

I wonder if this would not be an infringement of EU law that provides EU/EEA citizens and their family members the right to permanent residency in any member state where they have resided in line with the regulations for 5 continuous years. Taken from the EU Directive/2004/38/EC:

17."Enjoyment of permanent residence by Union citizens who have chosen to settle long term in the host Member State would strengthen the feeling of Union citizenship and is a key element in promoting social cohesion, which is one of the fundamental objectives of the Union. A right of permanent residence should therefore be laid down for all Union citizens and their family members who have resided in the host Member State in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Directive during a continuous period of five years without becoming subject to an expulsion measure."
18. "In order to be a genuine vehicle for integration into the society of the host Member State in which the Union citizen resides, the right of permanent residence, once obtained, should not be subject to any conditions." Special conditions should only be applied where the same is true for citizens of the member state. (Bolding mine)
It does remain to be seen how the government will implement (or disregard) this aspect of the directive.

I think the UK Government opted out of this directive which was accepted by most other EU states.

[Plum70]

It would have to be explained in writing, but we can guess that "probationary citizenship" will probably replace PR / ILR and will effectively fall under the same rules, similar to HSMP being replaced by Tier 1 (General)...

I wonder if this would not be an infringement of EU law that provides EU/EEA citizens and their family members the right to permanent residency in any member state where they have resided in line with the regulations for 5 continuous years. Taken from the EU Directive/2004/38/EC:

17."Enjoyment of permanent residence by Union citizens who have chosen to settle long term in the host Member State would strengthen the feeling of Union citizenship and is a key element in promoting social cohesion, which is one of the fundamental objectives of the Union. A right of permanent residence should therefore be laid down for all Union citizens and their family members who have resided in the host Member State in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Directive during a continuous period of five years without becoming subject to an expulsion measure."
18. "In order to be a genuine vehicle for integration into the society of the host Member State in which the Union citizen resides, the right of permanent residence, once obtained, should not be subject to any conditions." Special conditions should only be applied where the same is true for citizens of the member state. (Bolding mine)
It does remain to be seen how the government will implement (or disregard) this aspect of the directive.

I think the UK Government opted out of this directive which was accepted by most other EU states.

No. The UK did not 'opt out'. The EU Directive 2004/38/EC was transposed in 2006 to The Immigration Regulations (European Economic Area) 2006. Hence the above regulation must be upheld by the UKBA. This is evidenced by Jacqui Smith's statement in the green paper mapping out the proposed changes to BC that EU nationals with not be affected.

[muji]

Thanks to widespread abuse of uk migratiion systems... a pakistani british citizens` uk passport is more or less invalid in the usa

[Plum70]

Thanks to widespread abuse of uk migratiion systems... a pakistani british citizens` uk passport is more or less invalid in the usa

Please elaborate with appropriate resource links.

[Plum70]

Migrant workers face tighter work rules: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7904393.stm

[shanc]

For what it's worth, even if they put a "community service" element into the Green Paper it's unlikely ever to come into force, not least for the reason that community organisations probably have better things to do than handle 150,000 unwilling "volunteers" a year.

This Government is better known for its empty gestures and outright lies rather than telling the truth.

All that said, reality is that a small overcrowded nation cannot keep accepting 1-2m immigrants a decade, so do expect the criteria to be toughened up.

I would not be surprised if the residence period for naturalisation increased to 7 years and the spouse concession was removed. And even if it doesn't happen in the short term, it may happen later.

It does look like the proposals would extend the residence requirement by another year. What the Govt does not realise is that although the ILR requirement for WP/HSMP was increased from 4 to 5 years, the residence requirement for naturalisation was left unchanged at 5 years (with the last year on ILR).If they extend it to 6 years, it would mean that applicants would have to wait for 2 years after getting ILR to qualify for citizenship.

However, they would qualify for 'probationary Citizenship', whatever that means, after ILR by the sounds of it..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/2 ... tionpolicy

http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM ... xgPvxANLVA

I just dont get something - thirdwave. If the resident requirements increase to 6 years, applicants can still apply after 1 year of getting ILR...because by the time they apply, it will be 5 years for ILR and another 1 year staying as an ILR = 6 years in total.

pl clarify