ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


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

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

5 years for ILR rule implemented

General UK immigration & work permits; don't post job search or family related topics!

Please use this section of the board if there is no specific section for your query.

Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator

Locked
Dawie
Diamond Member
Posts: 1699
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:54 pm
Location: Down the corridor, two doors to the left

Post by Dawie » Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:50 pm

What about all the benefit-scrounging, beer-belly scratching, hoody wearing, good-for-nothing native British citizens who are nothing but a drain on the UK economy. Why do they never mention them? If economic productivity determines your right to live here then why haven't they all been kicked out yet?

Right-wing rubbish like this makes me angry. As far as I am concerned young, fit and healthy foreigners who are willing to do a hard days labour should be welcomed into this country, no matter where they come from. Good for nothing, lazy, benefit-scrounging, fag-smoking British yobs and chavs are the drain on society, not the foreigners.
In a few years time we'll look back on immigration control like we look back on American prohibition in the thirties - futile and counter-productive.

jes2jes
Senior Member
Posts: 692
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Post by jes2jes » Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:25 pm

Dawie wrote:
What about all the benefit-scrounging, beer-belly scratching, hoody wearing, good-for-nothing native British citizens who are nothing but a drain on the UK economy. Why do they never mention them? If economic productivity determines your right to live here then why haven't they all been kicked out yet?
Because they are Brits and they are entitled to be here. Sadly, foreigners come here on their own accord and they are not forced to come. You may argue that the UK need these highly skilled and hard working foreigners, which is true, but it boils down to choice. No matter how "bummy" a citizen is, S-He has more rights than a foreign millionaire who is a temporary resident. Remember the story of Al - Fayed of Harrods fame and his Brit Citizenship? A foreigner sadly is only good when he can provide the services the society requires, anything beside that, S-He is the scum of the earth. That is the sad truth. God help all foreigners - myself included.
Praise The Lord!!!!

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:53 pm

UK's youths have already started going into drains! They don't work hard, neither study hard.

Why not grant residency to immigrants on condition that they can't recourse public funds? I'm sure most high skilled immigrants (if not all) hate to see themselves on dole.

I personally know many aged British people who are actually fed up of today's british youths' attitudes. They prefer skilled immigrants from outside rather than idiot Brits for jobs.

Dawie
Diamond Member
Posts: 1699
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:54 pm
Location: Down the corridor, two doors to the left

Post by Dawie » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:40 pm

Why not grant residency to immigrants on condition that they can't recourse public funds? I'm sure most high skilled immigrants (if not all) hate to see themselves on dole.
Exactly. Although I currently hold ILR and am therefore entitled to public funds I can tell you that I couldn't care less whether or not I was entitled to these funds. I, and I'm sure most other immigrants, did not come to this country to scrounge off the state. I don't ever intend to become dependent on welfare benefits and that's certainly not the way I was brought up.

Unfortunately in this country there is a whole generation of people who have become professional benefit scroungers. The funny thing is that these people project their own criminality onto immigrants assuming that the newly arrived immigrants are intending to do the same as them....sponge off the state. And then they complain that the immigrants are taking their jobs...jobs which they have no intention of ever taking themselves because they can't be bothered to step out of their council houses!
In a few years time we'll look back on immigration control like we look back on American prohibition in the thirties - futile and counter-productive.

pumkin
Newbie
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:12 pm

Post by pumkin » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:04 pm

rooi_ding wrote:The article you are referring to is the European directive on long stay people of third citizen countries, it is by far a more fair system then the UK one which is a 10 years of continues stay. I am in a similar situation as you, however I was on an AV dependant visa before switching to a WP so I have spent eight years working continuously paying taxes contributing 10.9% to the GDP check out this article on MSN money
Rooiding, if you were a dependent on an AV, why didn't you get ILR when your parents did? Even if you were over 18, you could still apply as you entered as a dependent?

rooi_ding
Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:17 pm

Post by rooi_ding » Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:16 pm

A dependant on an AV also means married to an AV holder, sadly our ways parted but before they did my partner allowed me to apply for a WP before we went onto divorce proceedings. I am a bit older then 18 but thanks for the compliment..................

pumkin
Newbie
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:12 pm

Post by pumkin » Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:21 pm

rooi_ding wrote:A dependant on an AV also means married to an AV holder, sadly our ways parted but before they did my partner allowed me to apply for a WP before we went onto divorce proceedings. I am a bit older then 18 but thanks for the compliment..................
Duh! :oops: :roll: Of course!! How silly of me!! :lol:

We also came over on an AV with my family as my dependents! I forgot that the spouse is also a dependent! :?

nonothing
Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:04 am

Post by nonothing » Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:54 pm

easylife4me wrote:Citing research produced by the government, Migrationwatch concur that for an employee to make a positive lifetime contribution to society, they must earn £27,000 a year, measured in either tax contributions or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Admittedly, this is the average salary for full time employment, a salary which only 20% of migrants can achieve.
it'd be quite interesting to know how the figure works out. £27,000 - average salary for full time employment? in the UK?

rooi_ding
Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:17 pm

Post by rooi_ding » Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:22 pm

If you follow the link that i posted it gives you a break down on how they calculate it

here is something to think about, the reason migration watch are bleating on about having to earn a certain amount is because the know that lower paid immigrants present a cheap labor force and thus have the opportunity to exclude the English work force. In theory they are shooting themselves in the foot as soon as you exclude a competitive market you alienate yourself from the global market.

So if Mr. Brown was stupid enough to listen to these people and introduce such a scheme he would be sending the UK down a road of economic suicide. There has to be competition to be growth otherwise big companies would stop spending. The short sighted right wing dearly beloved have once again prove there ignorance and are only looking for short term solutions to there own short comings. DONT BLAME US BECAUSE WE PRODUCE BETER QUALITY FOR LESS MONEY.

Of course we would all like to earn more money but we all know that moving employer is quite difficult as employers are quite shy of the whole WP thing. So the government is restricting our own personal growth by adding more years on thus helping the UK economy. What it comes down to is that now the government is abusing its powers not just our employers.

nonothing
Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:04 am

Post by nonothing » Sat Sep 02, 2006 3:46 pm

cheers, rooi. i've read their report. let me ask a couple of easy questions to those jokers.

1. are they saying people in the UK (britons and immigrants) who are earning less than £27,000 are not contributing to the UK economy at all? that would mean more than half (honestly i think it could be more than 70% or so) of all employees are draining the state off. i can't even think of that if any country can survive in such a grimly situation. how funny that would be!

2. who do they think is more useful for the UK economy, a guy earning £25,000 with a partner earning the same income or a guy earning £30,000 with a partner and three kids at home?

besides, their calculation is a totally joke. the added 10% margin (costs of additional infrastructure which result from additional population) is groundless

their research team? i seriously doubt their ability to pass the primary school test.

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:52 pm

Any more updates please....

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:54 pm

I had been worried about this stupid report of migration watch, but after reading the comments here, I don't think that either they or their reports are worth of being considered.

stevej
Newly Registered
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:11 am

Post by stevej » Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:11 pm

Not sure what will happen next, but look the bigger picture here are many worrying signs

1 there are debate at the moment if the door should open to the citizen of New EU members to welcome them work in the UK

2 The anti immgration vioce is not only the immgration watch, but also some poll results being published recently suggesting the majority of UK public belive immgration is a bad thing

3 if Tony Blare is not PM anymore, what policy will his sucessor adapt?

4 London is under threat of terrist attacks constantly....

5 debate about if culture deversity benefit UK as a country ....

All the signs may lead to a much tighter, conservetive policy........even more dramtic policy changes.... who knows?

jayj
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by jayj » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:39 pm

No news yet??????????!!!!!!!!!!!! Stephen Kong u could at least let us know what's going on....keeping us guessing and waiting with anticipation. :evil:

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:14 pm

Any news update please...

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:59 pm

Looks like situation is not so promising :(

No update from anyone = no good news?

a11
Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:13 pm
Location: London

Post by a11 » Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:10 pm

VBSI is waiting for the Minister's response expected in mid-September, when both himself and the Parliament come back from holidays. If he doesn't respond as he promised, we will seek ways to get through to him and remind about the problem (this will be done via MPs).
At the same time, VBSI have written to Stephen Kong, but got no reply as yet. We will keep you updated.

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:59 pm

http://moderntribalist.blogspot.com/200 ... rk-by.html

It clearly states how the skilled immigrants are badly treated here. I am in UK for 8 years, but I am living here legally (4 years student, 4 years on work permit), paid loads of tax during last 4 years, never claimed a single penny from government funds, but all these things did not seem good enough to stupid stupid charles clark. 80,000 of illegal workers got what they thought, but 200,000 law abiding highly skilled workers are no where.

Is honesty not the best policy???

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:14 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... ge_id=1770


Government bungles means bogus refugees allowed to stay

Hundreds of asylum seekers are escaping deportation because of incompetence by the Government's shambolic immigration department, it has emerged.

Leaked e-mails reveal removals of many of the 400,000 bogus refugees living in the UK are being halted because staff lose their passports and travel documents.

It forces the cancellation of their flights home at the last minute - even though it has cost £11,000 to round them up and detain them prior to deportation.

It is one of the main reasons why almost a third of removals have to be halted at the eleventh hour, it has emerged.

Set free

They have to be either put back into detention centres while the documents are found, or set free.

The blunders are costing the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds.

A series of e-mails from an exasperated immigration official, seen by the Dail Mail, lay bare the incompetence at the processing centre for removals from Heathrow Airport, in London.

One, titled 'disappearing files', warns Tony Blair's promise to increase the number of removals is being put in peril by lost documentation.

The civil servant writes: "Due to the increasing amount of files that are being removed from the Detention hold, preset Removal directions have had to be reset and more are in danger of being cancelled".

Another, entitled ‘Matter of urgency’, and sent to all other enforcement centre staff, orders a hunt for missing documents. It pleads: "Confirmation of this is urgently needed by the reporting centre."

Without the documents, there is no way of sending failed asylum seekers home. Countries are only obliged to take bogus claimants if the UK has proof of their nationality.

Leaked e-mails

The e-mails, leaked by an angry immigration officer, are backed by a snapshot of the removal success rate at Heathrow.

Of 1,591 people brought to the centre in a single month, there were 450 last-minute failures.

In 95 cases the reasons were recorded as documentation problems - such as no ticket, no travel document, wrong name on ticket, wrong destination or removal directions sent in error.

In a further 139 cases, staff did not even bother to record the reason for the deportation being halted. Many of these are believed to involve lost passports or other paperwork.

Shadow Immigration Minister, Damian Green, said: "These documents show that so far John Reid's promise to sort out the chaos in the Immigration Department has not been turned into effective action.

Alarming

"It is massively alarming if passports are going missing at such a sensitive time. The picture painted by these leaks is of a department with low morale, chaotic systems, and no real sense of direction.

"Until the Home Office grips the basic management failures in the immigration system, all John Reid's rhetoric about improvement will be hollow."

The e-mails will be an acute embarrassment to the Home Secretary, who promised to sort out the shambolic department following his appointment in May.

Crucially, they were sent only last month - proving that his tough rhetoric has done little to end staff blunders.

They also demonstrate the mountain which the Government still has to climb to remove all the failed asylum seekers in the UK, estimated at anything between 287,000 and 400,000.

The Prime Minister has promised to remove more each month than there are new unfounded claims.

At current rates, clearing the backlog will take 20 years.

Yesterday, the Dail Mail revealed how the asylum target was forcing immigration staff to turn a blind eye to illegal working.

Employers who rang the immigration service with tip-offs about illegal immigrants said no decisive action was taken in half of cases.

It is because staff have been told to focus all their efforts on failed asylum seekers by managers, who fear they have no chance of promotion if they do not meet Mr Blair's demands.

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:11 am

any more updates please?

joannedp
Newly Registered
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:34 pm

ILR

Post by joannedp » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:44 pm

Not sure if anyone has read the minutes of a meeting the Immigration minister, Liam Byrne, had with various MPs in June 2006. (Here is the link, if you want to have a look: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 620s01.htm )

After reading this, I must admit, I'm definitely less optimistic about the outcome of what Mr Byrne will say, when he does finally revert back to the VBSI sometime in September. In lament terms, he is saying, "I hear what you're saying, but frankly, I don't really give a damn. If people really want to stay in the UK, then they won't mind waiting an additional year to get residency." He doesn't even respond to the question of added cost, added time and stress and also future plans that are jeopardised by this decision.

Well, let's wait and see what happens. Fingers crossed!

ssi
Junior Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 2:57 pm

Re: ILR

Post by ssi » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:30 pm

Joanne,

These minutes were posted here http://vbsi.org.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=41 , here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite ... es_-_ILR45 , and here http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?page=r ... om_the_mps

This is how LB and other Labour MPs talk to opposition MPs. You are right, they think as long as they are in majority, they can do whatever they want. Since then a number of Labour MPs tried to convince LB that such behaviour regarding this particular issue has a politically negative impact on Labour. LB's response to them was different, that is it was not an instant rebuke. He asked for more time (until mid-September) and said that "his response would not be as meaningless and irrelevant as heaps of previous letters sent by lower-rank HO officials."

tobiashomer
Junior Member
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:24 pm

Post by tobiashomer » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:06 pm

The decision on this issue will not be affected by any of the arguments made by (1) affected persons or (2) politicians of the opposition. We have no constituency, are not real hardship cases like poor asylum-seekers facing a death sentence (real or otherwise) if they are returned home. Many of us are visibly middle-class with a marked capitalist tendency (which one might be forgiven for thinking is what HSMP was designed for). There is no political capital to be gained by being nice to us, quite the contrary; being firm with us, however, is an effortless and risk-free means of showing resolve, purposefulness, and dedication to the public good as its definition has altered since all those Polish plumbers showed up.

Mr Byrne will decide against us. Recommended reading for the deluded optimists amongst us: The Scum of the Earth by Arthur Koestler (London, Eland Books), which tells the story of how and why the French persecuted the anti-Fascists in their country at the beginning of the war against Hitler (i.e., one would have thought, against Fascism). In a nutshell, you go for soft targets with no-one to stand up for them except HM's loyal oppostion, whom you are paid to talk to.

PS: the Russian definition of an optimist; a pessimist is someone who says "It can't get worse than this." An optimist is one who says: "Oh yes it can!"

BadPaul
Newbie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:43 pm

Post by BadPaul » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:08 pm

Dear all,

I just wanted to give you an update on the legal case front.

Since my last post I have joined VBSI to look into the legal alternative in case lobbying will fail.

I already contacted Stephen Kong asking him to meet me and discuss the current status of the JR application, also mentioning to him that VBSI might be interested to join efforts and participate in the JR.

One observation: Like all ( or most ) of you I have a full time job, therefore I do all this in my spare time, so there is a limit to what I can do. . Anyone who would like to join me and help me look into the legal case alternative is more than welcome.

I will try and keep you posted on the progress with the legal case.

Best regards,

Paul

a11
Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:13 pm
Location: London

Post by a11 » Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:26 pm

tobiashomer, what you are saying is very reasonable.

The only hope I personally have is that we represent the most integrated part of the immigrant population. Most probably, we are going to stay in the country anyway, get naturalisation and within foreseeable time will be allowed to vote (on the other hand, most of us have at least three years until then, which will be past the next general elections...). Secondly, we have strongest links with already naturalised immigrants, which might affect their views.

But indeed, it's not that likely that the top-rank politicians will take these factors into account... This might be a source of a headache for a local MP with a high percentage of immigrant constituents (Andrew Dismore is an example), but further up they probably play different games.

Locked