Her Majesty's forces still only 4 yrs to ILR

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 1:23 pm

With the new SET (O) application forms out on PDF I took the opportunity to peruse them to see if there was any obvious changes apart from the 5 year change I did notice that if you are a member of Her Majesty’s forces and are about to be discharged or have already been discharged from the forces you can still clam ILR after 4 years.

Is this not like the COA case were there was obvious discrimination against people who were married in a registers office to those getting married in Church.

So its okay to prejudice against the WP, HSMP’s, AV and all employment based visa’s and bring them inline with Europe (what a farce) but lets keep the soldiers happy because that’s what we need in this world more people who know how to kill.

Is this the bases for a legal case?

ppron747 · Post by **ppron747** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 1:29 pm

Er - get a life?

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 1:34 pm

Sorry can you elaborate "get a life" means nothing

It has no basses for any discussion if you have an opinion then give it. If you don’t have an opinion then simply keeping quite might be more becoming to your character.

Does anyone out there actually have anything intelligent to say

tvt · Post by **tvt** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:33 pm

These guys have risked their life for the UK. They should have qualified earlier than 4 years.

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:58 pm

Yes they might risk there lives sometimes (having served in Her majesty's forces or be it in part time capacity along side full time soldiers, Royal engineers specialist units) 90% of foreign personal never see any active duty or come into a combat situation.

They know that when they join there might be a slim chance of death. The most hardship they face is their RSM. Any person who lives in London faces the same possibility of death while crossing the street.

As George Orwell said in Animal Farm "All animals are created equal just some are created more equal then others"

Do not perceive because a man carry's a gun that he is a hero

Dawie · Post by **Dawie** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:39 pm

These guys have risked their life for the UK. They should have qualified earlier than 4 years.

They didn't risk their lives for the UK, they've risked their lives for Tony Blair and George Bush. Hardly a noble achievement. Work permit holders are far more deserving of early ILR.

first2last4 · Post by **first2last4** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:57 pm

Dawie wrote:
These guys have risked their life for the UK. They should have qualified earlier than 4 years.
They didn't risk their lives for the UK, they've risked their lives for Tony Blair and George Bush. Hardly a noble achievement. Work permit holders are far more deserving of early ILR.

Well said

RobinLondon · Post by **RobinLondon** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:14 pm

Perspective, amigos...perspective.

I think most UK citizens would place veterans on a slightly higher plane than other migrants. I reckon that I probably would as well. In any case, I don't think there's any political ground to be gained by raising this as an arguing point, but that's just my 2p.

Dawie · Post by **Dawie** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:18 pm

I think most UK citizens would place veterans on a slightly higher plane than other migrants.

I hope you're talking about WW1 and WW2 veterans.

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:40 pm

Yes you are right the general public would do that, this is why the have not changed it for the forces. There would be a general outcry it would be easy to drum up support to get the retrospective rule changed. This is deliberate discrimination as these soldiers are in the army sitting out there four years and then applying for ILR just like the WP HSMP's and AV's were doing.

This is painfully obvious that the 5 years is a convenient way of reducing numbers and increasing revenue there is no way they are keeping inline with the European norm, as I have said before the 5 year European long stay residency is a combination of legal stay in the EU country including 2.5 years as a student. England has such a long residency ILR section but everyone knows it is a 10 year period. The UK is not moving closer to Europe it is just moving further away.

bbdivo · Post by **bbdivo** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:22 pm

rooi_ding wrote:This is deliberate discrimination as these soldiers are in the army sitting out there four years and then applying for ILR just like the WP HSMP's and AV's were doing.

Do you have proof of this? And what sort of numbers are we talking about here? I doubt they are just 'sitting out' I'm sure they could get called up to active duty at any time, Iraq or Afghanistan.

Despite what anyone thinks, these people are willing to defend the queen and country so that people like us (including you) can enjoy the benefits of immigrating and living in a country like the UK. Perhaps one year less on ILR is not enough for people like this?

Marie B · Post by **Marie B** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:56 pm

How many people do you think could make use of this? - I'd hazard a guess at almost none.

To join the armed forces you must fulfil certain nationality requirements. Looking at the requirements to join the Army, RAF and Navy - there must be hardly anyone 'sitting out their four years for ILR'.

http://www.armyjobs.mod.uk/RegularArmy/ ... y/Soldier/

http://www.rafcareers.com/istherafforme ... idency.cfm

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.4249

I agree that anyone in the armed forces should not have to wait 4 years for their ILR, it should be less.

Dawie · Post by **Dawie** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:36 pm

Despite what anyone thinks, these people are willing to defend the queen and country so that people like us (including you) can enjoy the benefits of immigrating and living in a country like the UK. Perhaps one year less on ILR is not enough for people like this?

Err...I'm sorry, remind me again, what exactly are they defending us against? Just as well we have them over in the middle east to stop those pesky innocent Iraqis and Afghans from invading us!

bbdivo · Post by **bbdivo** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:42 pm

Dawie wrote:
Despite what anyone thinks, these people are willing to defend the queen and country so that people like us (including you) can enjoy the benefits of immigrating and living in a country like the UK. Perhaps one year less on ILR is not enough for people like this?
Err...I'm sorry, remind me again, what exactly are they defending us against? Just as well we have them over in the middle east to stop those pesky innocent Iraqis and Afghans from invading us!

Sorry mate wasn't being specific about who they were defending us against, just making a point that they are willing to defend the queen and country. However if you feel we need to be protected from 'those pesky innocent Iraqis and Afghans' then thats your opinion.

Post by **JAJ** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:58 am

Dawie wrote:
I think most UK citizens would place veterans on a slightly higher plane than other migrants.
I hope you're talking about WW1 and WW2 veterans.

And Korea, Malaya, Iraq, the Falklands and Northern Ireland, to name a few. Plus the not insubstantial task of keeping the Warsaw Pact out of western Europe for 40-ish years.

Australia and the United States waive most residence and other requirements for serving or former military personnel who wish to be naturalised. It is likely that mainstream British opinion would solidly support a move in this direction by the United Kingdom.

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:04 pm

You have group's of people group A, group B, group C, Group X.
All of them have to fill full certain requirements in order qualify for ILR, lets say that period is 4 years.

Then the rules are changed and group's A, B & C now have to complete 5 years. Group X stay's at 4 years. There is no relevance to who they are or what they do (or even what opinion we have of them). The main point is that if the UK was bringing itself inline with Europe then they would bring all of these groups inline with the 5 year rule.

Which indicates to me that the five year rule is a farce and that in fact in it is an attempt to generate revenue and to reduce numbers, or some other sinister scheme that the HO has come up with.

As I have explained before the five year qualifying period is 5 years continues legal stay including 2.5 years as a student. So just to say the UK is bringing itself inline by adding a another year in fact takes it further away from the European norm as the European long stay visa equates to the UK 10 year ILR in terms of its requirements. 5 years seems like a number picked at random there is no clear clarification as to it’s actually origin as it is nothing like the European norm

The only similarity is in the number 5

Were I come from this would be clearly be seen as discrimination and we have specific laws that would not allow this to happen (we have learnt the hard way)

UK politics is covered in spin and propaganda this is how politicians they keep there jobs it is our responsibility to expose the corrupt and unjust ones that would abuse there power just because they think they can.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:42 pm

I'm sorry but what pisses me off is people freshly in the country bleating on about 'it's not fair' and quoting 'rights'.

If you don't like it why not go home?

Steve

RobinLondon · Post by **RobinLondon** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:55 pm

Rooi Ding-

Wanderer's response would be typical of most UK citizens' response to your argument, I think/fear.

As for your whole EU-alignment tack, I think the Government's position would be that they are only implementing this change for economic migrants, which I believe is the context of the EU's regulations. If you noticed, there was no change to the residency requirements for spouses of UK citizens, for instance. I think the Government would make the case that as guardians of the nation's defence, members of HM forces are not economic migrants in the pure sense, hence the exemption.

Again, I'm just trying to consider others' positions. It is a political process after all.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:03 pm

RobinLondon wrote:Rooi Ding-

Wanderer's response would be typical of most UK citizens' response to your argument, I think/fear.

As for your whole EU-alignment tack, I think the Government's position would be that they are only implementing this change for economic migrants, which I believe is the context of the EU's regulations. If you noticed, there was no change to the residency requirements for spouses of UK citizens, for instance. I think the Government would make the case that as guardians of the nation's defence, members of HM forces are not economic migrants in the pure sense, hence the exemption.

Again, I'm just trying to consider others' positions. It is a political process after all.

Now I've calmed down a bit I'd like to add I've no problems with race, immigration, etc my gf is Asian (that's why I'm here) but it's just not common decency the play 'the it's not fair' card or spout 'discrimination' when someone else is getting a little bit extra.

I don't mention my personal life much insofar as it effects our visa issues but I've done my bit and seen some truly horrible things, and I think these boys deserve this bit extra.

Apologies for any offence but I still think the OP is wrong.

Steve

timefactor · Post by **timefactor** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:12 pm

we are not freshers in this country. we, most of us spent our 4 years here in highly skilled jobs with good earnings and contributing back to this country.

Wanderer wrote: people freshly in the country bleating on about 'it's not fair' and quoting 'rights'.

If you don't like it why not go home?

Steve

nonothing · Post by **nonothing** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:41 pm

guys, what do you think about this:

Migrant amnesty 'not ruled out'

The prospect of an amnesty for illegal immigrants has been raised by the new minister in charge of immigration.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5076546.stm

Dawie · Post by **Dawie** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:47 pm

I'm sorry but what pisses me off is people freshly in the country bleating on about 'it's not fair' and quoting 'rights'.

What pisses me off even more is when UK citizens start moaning about migrants expressing their views and asserting their rights. We're here, we're not going away, so deal with it.

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:54 pm

I am going to have one of those knee jerk reactions

If we all went home then the UK would loose 10% of its GDP, err do you still want us all to leave now because when an EU or UK citizen can not do the job required we fill the gap we understand that we will pay higher taxes wont claim benefits in order to obtain ILR after 4 years we do not appreciate having the rug pulled out from under us at the last minute.

And we at least have the rational thought processes to figure out that this is an injustice no matter what country you live in. Especially when they blatantly discriminate against different groups

This is discrimination nothing to do with unfair. unfair would be England scoring the wining goal in the final and then having it disallowed because the official thought it was offside when clearly it was not...........

They are playing with our lives that is not unfair that is injustice

You can never understand a person untill you walk in his shoes......

nonothing · Post by **nonothing** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:13 pm

Wanderer wrote:If you don't like it why not go home?

that's a typical reaction from a british citizen. i saw a lot of those on the BBC website. they say it even before they look into this matter. they don't really know what's going on. they just simply say "GET OUT! YOU IMMIGRANTS!" i really feel sorry that it's the reaction from the citizens of a nation used to be gent and just.

Dawie · Post by **Dawie** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:18 pm

The fact of the matter is that the entire Earth belongs to all of us and we all have the god-given right to reside ANYWHERE on this planet that we choose.

Passports, visas and immigration controls are a 20th century wartime invention and as such should be left there as relics of our past.

Guess what, Wanderer, you can tell all us immigrants to go home, but we ARE home! Hahaha, that's the funniest thing about your ignorant statement. Do you want us to leave the planet?

Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Her Majesty's forces still only 4 yrs to ILR

Her Majesty's forces still only 4 yrs to ILR