- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
That's my understanding as well. As far as I can make out, our eligibility for ILR is time based, not skills based. They want us to reside here for longer before we can apply for permanent settlement. I really think people are getting the wrong end of the stick about the HO applying points or tier systems to applying for ILR.Dawie wrote:The issue I am not clear on is this........
Surely, no matter what visa category we are talking about, the points-based system ONLY applies to actually getting the work permit.
As far as I know there will be no points system for applying for ILR no matter what visa you had leading up to your application for ILR.
Is this correct?
yes, it's correct. "points system for applying for ILR" is people's concern based on what the HO has done in the past 3 months.Dawie wrote:The issue I am not clear on is this........
Surely, no matter what visa category we are talking about, the points-based system ONLY applies to actually getting the work permit.
As far as I know there will be no points system for applying for ILR no matter what visa you had leading up to your application for ILR.
Is this correct?
How would they round us all up and make us re-apply ?? They can't even keep tabs on foreigners LEAVING PRISON! If they are contemplating just giving up on the illegals by giving them amnesty, I'm pretty sure they won't be bothered tracking every one on a WP/HSMP. The only ways to do this would be to intercept at re-entry (i.e. go on holiday outside UK and try to come back), or follow up with the company who sponsored WP. It would be easier to introduce the points system for ILR applications, because they don't have to look for you - you're coming through the front door, application in handnonothing wrote: yes, it's correct. "points system for applying for ILR" is people's concern based on what the HO has done in the past 3 months.
i personally don't think that would happen. well, hopefully! but i totally understand where the concern comes from.
plus, if the HO importunes the current WP/HSMP holders to re-apply their working visas, it means they virtually apply the point-based system to the ILR anyway. and they did consult this, which means it's possible.
That's easy to answer, they are dealing with the same number of applications, they are just on the FLR forms rather than the SET(O) forms (basically identical) and they will be processing those for the next four years. The IN&D will be doing a massive amount of double handling of the same applicants forms: FLR the first year, ILR the following year, and then possible naturalisation/passport applications the year after that. Has the HO actually considered the work load involved with all this double handling, and how it will affect their already overworked and under-paid front line staff?seff_efrican wrote:I wonder what they're doing with all the spare time, given that ILR applications would be virtually zero at the moment!!
because we're legal, we're easy tracked. the illegal immigrants never report to the police, but we do. we do everything the HO asks us to do, that's why we get punished.nonothing wrote:How would they round us all up and make us re-apply ?? They can't even keep tabs on foreigners LEAVING PRISON!
they're ploting another conspiracy towards us, surely.nonothing wrote:I wonder what they're doing with all the spare time, given that ILR applications would be virtually zero at the moment!!
Has anybody else listened to this? I listened to it last night and the arguments being put forward sounded really good (as if the politicians were really listening to us!) however at the end there was a vote and the 'Aye's won, am I right in saiyng thats the end of that? That is it wont be taken any further?gunslinger wrote:Hi All
You can listen to the proceedings at the standing committee yesterday by visiting:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/ > This Week >Tuesday > Committees> HoC Second Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation to consider the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (HC 1016)
joseph.DJ@558.net on LKCN.net/eubbs wrote:just to report on the outcome of the standing committee meeting.
The meeting was called by nick clegg the Lim Dem Home affairs spokesman, Damiem Green form the conservative are also behind the campaign.
Liam Byrne explain the official line and the opposition state the hardship case. and in the end there was a vote. as expected, the government win because the committee was set up in proportion to the government's majority. the campaign have lose a small battle, but just it is definitely NOT the end of the road.
There is a slight mis-conception in the proceeding of the meeting. The vote is not itself part of the law making process, as a secondary legislation, the change has already passed into law. If the vote was won, the government would have to come back with some kind of response, although not necessary change the law back. the lose of the vote only mean the protest of the opposition at this stage did not manage to make any impact.
The campaign will now focus on a more direct lobby with Liam Byrne. every one is now urged to write to him and John Reid directly.
The timing is now crucial. To make used of the impact of the demo, the campaign need to keep up the momentum in the next two weeks. Christine Lee will be meeting with Liam Byrne in the next 2 weeks and the House of Lord is following this at the same time.
joseph.DJ@558.net on LKCN.net/eubbs wrote:Statement of Nick Clegg MP (Spokesperson of the Liberal Democrats)
"I called for the committee debate on this unjustified measure in order to hear the Government's side of the story, yet the minister remained unable to explain why this rule change must be applied retrospectively. It is totally unfair to disrupt the lives of thousands of people who reasonably assumed the qualifying period for indefinite leave to remain applications would not simply be changed overnight. It is still not too late for the Minister to agree a simple amendment which would retain the Government's extension of the qualifying period but simply not apply it retrospectively. I very much hope the Minister will listen to the persuasive arguments that have been put to him by opposition parties and so many individuals whose lives will be turned upside down by this change."
I totally agree with this.If we could be able to send 300 to 400 emails to these two persons.It can make some impact as CL is also going to arrange meeting with him.Right now everybody should send emails to Liam Bryne and John Reid so that they could be aware of our serious concerns about these changes.Letter could be;The campaign will now focus on a more direct lobby with Liam Byrne. every one is now urged to write to him and John Reid directly.The timing is now crucial
we can definitely do it, no question, but I suspect that they all will go to junk mail folder or at best to some low rank official who will reply with a standard letter. However, if we ask our MPs to do it again, then both John Reid and Liam Bryne will have to respond (though not personally I guess).aj77 wrote:I totally agree with this.If we could be able to send 300 to 400 emails to these two persons.It can make some impact as CL is also going to arrange meeting with him.Right now everybody should send emails to Liam Bryne and John Reid so that they could be aware of our serious concerns about these changes.Letter could be;The campaign will now focus on a more direct lobby with Liam Byrne. every one is now urged to write to him and John Reid directly.The timing is now crucial
...
We need the email ID's of Liam Bryne and John Reid to send this letter to them.Can anybody provide their email ID's?
This shows that retrospective element has been discussed and Government couldn't jusify it.Earliar Government officials repeatedly said that it is not retrospective.I called for the committee debate on this unjustified measure in order to hear the Government's side of the story, yet the minister remained unable to explain why this rule change must be applied retrospectively
JR: reidj@parliament.ukaj77 wrote:We need the email ID's of Liam Bryne and John Reid to send this letter to them.Can anybody provide their email ID's?
Thanks for the link. I must say I am disappointed by Liam Byrne not really addressing the objections to the rule changes. It's like he doesn't understand the value/difference of ILR from our current status (WP, HSMP, etc.). To say that we would still be allowed in the country anyway so this law change doesn't really impact our lives is just callous and shortsighted. Especially after it was already pointed out that mortgages, tuition fees, even job offers depend on someone's immigration status. And I'm disappointed that he didn't address the point that we deserve reliable and stable laws (pointed out by the Sheffield MP). And as for encouraging social integration and the "greater degree of attachment to the UK" that the extra 12 months will provide, nothing discourages integration more than disillusionment. If the government can be this fickle, unreliable and inconsiderate of our lives, how can we be expected to trust it?gunslinger wrote:Hi All
You can listen to the proceedings at the standing committee yesterday by visiting:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/ > This Week >Tuesday > Committees> HoC Second Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation to consider the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (HC 1016)
formal complaints to Immigration Minister Liam Byrne about the rule changes.sowhat wrote:we can definitely do it, no question, but I suspect that they all will go to junk mail folder or at best to some low rank official who will reply with a standard letter. However, if we ask our MPs to do it again, then both John Reid and Liam Bryne will have to respond (though not personally I guess).aj77 wrote:I totally agree with this.If we could be able to send 300 to 400 emails to these two persons.It can make some impact as CL is also going to arrange meeting with him.Right now everybody should send emails to Liam Bryne and John Reid so that they could be aware of our serious concerns about these changes.Letter could be;The campaign will now focus on a more direct lobby with Liam Byrne. every one is now urged to write to him and John Reid directly.The timing is now crucial
do you think that we should personalise the letters or send them a s they are? I personally think that a standard letter for a formal complain is fine. Also they usually reply with standard letters so why should we bother. However, I would like to check.nonothing wrote:formal complaints to Immigration Minister Liam Byrne about the rule changes.sowhat wrote:we can definitely do it, no question, but I suspect that they all will go to junk mail folder or at best to some low rank official who will reply with a standard letter. However, if we ask our MPs to do it again, then both John Reid and Liam Bryne will have to respond (though not personally I guess).aj77 wrote:I totally agree with this.If we could be able to send 300 to 400 emails to these two persons.It can make some impact as CL is also going to arrange meeting with him.Right now everybody should send emails to Liam Bryne and John Reid so that they could be aware of our serious concerns about these changes.Letter could be;The campaign will now focus on a more direct lobby with Liam Byrne. every one is now urged to write to him and John Reid directly.The timing is now crucial
three versions of the text, best suited for:
affected persons
employers
persons not directly affected by the changes
please print them out and ask as many people as you can to sign a version that is most relevant. send the complaints directly to Liam Byrne's office in the Parliament as stated in the text. it's also a very good idea to send a copy to your local MP.
have a look at http://www.writetothem.com/about-qa#formletterssowhat wrote: do you think that we should personalise the letters or send them a s they are? I personally think that a standard letter for a formal complain is fine. Also they usually reply with standard letters so why should we bother. However, I would like to check.
i very much share your point. if we can personalise the letter, that'd be ideal. but if we don't have time to do so, we can just send the identical one and see if it works. it's better than nothing.sowhat wrote:do you think that we should personalise the letters or send them a s they are? I personally think that a standard letter for a formal complain is fine. Also they usually reply with standard letters so why should we bother. However, I would like to check.nonothing wrote:formal complaints to Immigration Minister Liam Byrne about the rule changes.sowhat wrote:we can definitely do it, no question, but I suspect that they all will go to junk mail folder or at best to some low rank official who will reply with a standard letter. However, if we ask our MPs to do it again, then both John Reid and Liam Bryne will have to respond (though not personally I guess).aj77 wrote: I totally agree with this.If we could be able to send 300 to 400 emails to these two persons.It can make some impact as CL is also going to arrange meeting with him.Right now everybody should send emails to Liam Bryne and John Reid so that they could be aware of our serious concerns about these changes.Letter could be;
three versions of the text, best suited for:
affected persons
employers
persons not directly affected by the changes
please print them out and ask as many people as you can to sign a version that is most relevant. send the complaints directly to Liam Byrne's office in the Parliament as stated in the text. it's also a very good idea to send a copy to your local MP.