"Not disclosed” guidance

[popeye]

Does anyone know how to acquire information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, in particular "Not disclosed” guidance from IND ?
Anything special or different in the request?

it's in relation to this EDI'S:

"EUROPEAN DIRECTORATE INSTRUCTIONS 05/06
CHAPTER 7
ACCESSION STATE NATIONALS
9. Permanent Residence
A8 Nationals and their family members are eligible for permanent residence once they have exercised their Treaty Rights in the United Kingdom for 5 years. The time spent in the United Kingdom prior to 1 May 2004 does not count towards the qualifying period for permanent residence. However time spent as a registered worker on the Workers Registration Scheme will count towards the qualifying period. If we receive a request for permanent residence the applicant should be informed that /she does not qualify for permanent residence and will only be entitled to a document certifying permanent residence when s/he has exercised Treaty Rights for 5 years in the United Kingdom. S/heshould also be told that his/her application will be treated as withdrawn after 28 days unless s/he indicates in writing, that s/he wishes to continue with his/her application.A letter informing the applicant of the above can be found at Annex F of this chapter.
NB: Employment prior to 1 May 2004 does not count towards the qualifying period. This would also include people in self-employment under the ECAA association agreement or those who were granted leave to enter or remain under the Immigration Rules in categories leading to settlement. Should the applicant choose to continue with the application, s/he should be refused on the basis that s/he has not exercised Treaty Rights for 5 years in the UK. Please refer to Chapter 6 for details on refusing permanent residence. "

Is it possible HO in contrary to what is published above to decide their cases based on different Guides?

[ppron747]

Does anyone know how to acquire information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, in particular "Not disclosed” guidance from IND ?.......<snip>
.......Is it possible HO in contrary to what is published above to decide their cases based on different Guides?

Have a look at this page on the IND website for general guidance on release of information, popeye.

I'm no great expert on immigration matters, but I think it is one thing to write guidance, then mark it "not disclosed" on the public website. There are several documents like this on the IND website. But it is a very different matter to publish guidance on the website, and then operate by entirely different instructions, the existence of which is kept secret, as I think you are suggesting.

I may be naive, but I don't think this could happen, in today's "whistleblower" society, especially in a government department as big as the Home Office. If they were to try it, a faxed copy of the "undisclosed" instructions would certainly be received by every one of the broadsheet newspapers.

That's what I think, anyway, FWIW....

[popeye]

Home Office Freedom of Information Publication Scheme
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ ... iew=Binary

Class: Immigration & Nationality Directorate: current legislation and
related staff guidance
Description: Information on current legislation and related staff guidance on immigration, asylum and nationality in the UK.
Format available: website at www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/
Chargeable information: -
Notes: Guidance to IND staff contains confidential information and the
version published has been edited where the public interest would
otherwise be harmed.

I remember what the result of previous whistle blowing was, and the case of the whistleblower Steve Moxon , you may be right...
I am puzzled by all solicitors and HO Workers who are saying that The Clock will not be reset and all years counts...Yet looking at the EDI's which are totally clear how HO will apply the rules, and what counts, what a mistery
I give up, and will send them (HO) a letter to acquire any undisclosed information or guidance...
I don’t really have an Idea how People are telling me all these statements(lawyers and workers) when at the same time the policy is clear and as you said it's a good opportunity for someone to make some cash, Steve Moxon for example.Maybe they know something I don't...

thanks for your help.[/url]

[first2last4]

I hope this is not for commonwealth national.

[Dawie]

What really puzzles me is why so many A8 nationals (nationals from the new European Union countries) on this board are so hung up about waiting for ILR or what does and does not count towards ILR. Just count yourselves lucky that you are able to stay here indefinitely without needing any visa or leave to remain. Why on Earth you guys are so concerned about waiting a few extra years for ILR (which you don't even need anyway) is beyond me.

There are also a few nationals from old European Union countries (like France and Italy) that are concerned about getting ILR.

[popeye]

What really puzzles me is why so many A8 nationals (nationals from the new European Union countries) on this board are so hung up about waiting for ILR or what does and does not count towards ILR. Just count yourselves lucky that you are able to stay here indefinitely without needing any visa or leave to remain. Why on Earth you guys are so concerned about waiting a few extra years for ILR (which you don't even need anyway) is beyond me.

There are also a few nationals from old European Union countries (like France and Italy) that are concerned about getting ILR.

A2 - the new members have been excluded from access to the labour marker and few extra years (2+3+2) or at least 5, without right to work in UK unless highly skilled person.

So these people have to be self-employed or have to pretend that they are self-employed, have to count on their spouses who eventually will have right to work and Davie I can't see why I should count myself lucky.
I have spent years trying to get normal status in UK, and please don't tell me that if you have resided UK, worked your balls off, paid your taxes as self-employed should be refused ILR or full access to benefits, Work and so… have to wait for another 5 years again to repeat myself Without access to the labour market.

Sorry Dave but calling myself lucky is not enough to get a job...Please Excuse me I forgot mentioning the two new members A2 an that this mostly concern of Romanians and Bulgarians.

I am kind of a Buddhist and what Buddha said is to be concern about your problems, not to compare, not to see other people chances or successes …but to challenge what is successful …challenge your own opinion …who is lucky and who is not…what is actually success, does it really mater the idea of success.

So Dave, please challenge your opinion why do you think I am lucky…
Being an immigrant on its own is not what people should call a Lucky person, coming from country with totally different language, wit, culture, ideology, internal values…does this make me more lucky than you guys born in English speaking Commonwealth countries ? At least you don’t have to give up so much of your own values to actually make space for new ones.

Please, if its so wrong to ask and hung around in this forum I shall not bother you anymore…

[Dawie]

Let me clarify, I am only of course talking about the A8, that is the new countries that joined the European Union in June 2004. These citizens are not just restricted to self-employment but in fact enjoy almost full employment rights in the UK, only being required to join the workers authorisation scheme for the first 12 months which is nothing more than a rubber stamp.

The point I am trying to make is that the rights that these citizens enjoy are so substantial that obtaining ILR would make little difference to them in reality, other than their UK-born children being able to immediately become British citizens and of course that they themselves can eventually become British citizens. For all intents and purposes being, for example, a Polish citizen carrying a Polish passport without ILR gives you just as much right to live and work in the UK as it would if you did have ILR.

[popeye]

Anyway, its not a big deal...and thanks for your help.

These citizens are not just restricted to self-employment but in fact enjoy almost full employment rights in the UK, only being required to join the workers authorisation scheme for the first 12 months which is nothing more than a rubber stamp.

have a look at this:

http://www.barka.org.pl/misja_anglia/misja_eng.htm

How equal is a hungry, failed, homeless, depressed pole to all other EU Citizens?

[first2last4]

Anyway, its not a big deal...and thanks for your help.

These citizens are not just restricted to self-employment but in fact enjoy almost full employment rights in the UK, only being required to join the workers authorisation scheme for the first 12 months which is nothing more than a rubber stamp.

have a look at this:

http://www.barka.org.pl/misja_anglia/misja_eng.htm

How equal is a hungry, failed, homeless, depressed pole to all other EU Citizens?

Indeed there is a HUGE difference being A8 or a commonwealth citizen. Commonwealth citizen takes the decision to settle here on the basis that they would qualify for ILR (as promised) and lead a peaceful life. Finally they hear this news that they may need to

Sell their house
sell their Car and other asset
Leave the Job
Go back to thier country with their family
Search for a new job back home
settle their kids for the new school etc etc

Should I add more to it... hope you can envisage the sea difference between A8 and Commonwealth

[Dawie]

Anyway, its not a big deal...and thanks for your help.

These citizens are not just restricted to self-employment but in fact enjoy almost full employment rights in the UK, only being required to join the workers authorisation scheme for the first 12 months which is nothing more than a rubber stamp.

have a look at this:

http://www.barka.org.pl/misja_anglia/misja_eng.htm

How equal is a hungry, failed, homeless, depressed pole to all other EU Citizens?

The French, Germans, Italians, etc have the exact same right to be hungry, failed, homeless and depressed as Poles.

I fail to see how the immigration rights that Poles have in the UK have anything to do with the success or lack of it that they have in the UK once they get here. That is purely up to the individual.

Homeless and out of luck Poles on British streets are in that situation because they have failed to grasp the life skills required to successfully live in British society. They are NOT in that position because of their immigration status. To say that the Poles and citizens of other new European Union countries are being unfairly treated when in fact they have enviable employment rights in the UK compared to citizens of other countries in the world is an insult to the thousands of highly-skilled economic migrants in this country who ARE in fact being unfairly treated. I am of course speaking of the outrageous treatment currently being meted out to people who were hoping to qualify for ILR in 4 years but now have to wait 5 year, and of course also of the new HSMP system which has caught so many by surprise with little time to prepare.

To be quite frank, citizens of countries of the A8 countries have got an easy ride compared the thousands of legal economic migrants who currently getting a raw deal in the UK.

[popeye]

Dave, I see your point but ….But there is sometning called second class Europeans …
I don’t have to prove my point to you; obviously you have your point, I Respect it.

https://elaw.murdoch.edu.au/issues/2006 ... 006_12.pdf

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsB ... _id=384950


Dave being homeless is not just being homeless, it is the idea of Coming Here in Britain that have made about 40000 poles Homeless, personal tragedies are unfolding in front of our eyes, just because they come here unprepared…Big Topic, and thanks god, the Polish Government have some Common sense.

No point to continue our useless dispute. Thoughtful though…

"A dog is not considered to be good because it barks well; a
man is not considered to be worthy because he speaks well
Speech is not merely the blowing of air. Speech is intended to say
something, but what is spoken may not necessarily be valid. If it
is not valid, has anything actually been spoken? Or has speech
never actually occurred?

Suppose that you and I have a dispute. If you beat me and I
lose to you, does that mean you're really right and I'm really
wrong? If I beat you and you lose to me, does that mean I'm really
right and you 're really wrong? Is one of us right and the other
wrong? Or are both of us right and both of us wrong? Neither you
nor I can know, and others are even more in the dark. Whom shall
we have decide the matter? Shall we have someone who agrees
with you decide it? Since he agrees with you, how can he decide
fairly? Shall we have someone who agrees with me decide it? Since
he agrees with me, how can he decide fairly? Shall we have
someone who differs with both of us decide it? Since he differs
with both of us, how can he make a decision? Shall we have
someone who agrees with both of us decide it? Since he agrees
with both of us, how can he make a decision? Given that neither
you nor I, nor another person, can know how to decide, shall we
wait for still another?
Now, when I asked you, you knew the
answers. Why did you say you weren't even close?
Why act so confused about it? Explain what is confusing with
what is not confusing so that you may return to unconfusion,
and this will be the greatest unconfusion.
Men all respect what their knowledge enables them to know, but no one knows how to
rely on what their knowledge doesn't enable them to know so that later they could really know.
Words are for catching ideas; once you've caught the idea, you
can forget about the words. Where can I find a person who
knows how to forget about words so that I can have a few words
with him?The reason were not even close is because we knew.
There are grounds for affirmation and there are grounds
for denial. There are grounds for saying that something is so
and there are grounds for saying that something is not so. Why
are things so? They are so because we declare them to be so.
Why are things not so? They are not so because we declare
them to be not so. Wherein lies affirmation? Affirmation lies
in our affirming. Wherein lies denial? Denial lies in our denying.
All things are possessed of that which we may say is so; all
things are possessed of that which we may affirm."

[JAJ]

What really puzzles me is why so many A8 nationals (nationals from the new European Union countries) on this board are so hung up about waiting for ILR or what does and does not count towards ILR. Just count yourselves lucky that you are able to stay here indefinitely without needing any visa or leave to remain. Why on Earth you guys are so concerned about waiting a few extra years for ILR (which you don't even need anyway) is beyond me.

There are also a few nationals from old European Union countries (like France and Italy) that are concerned about getting ILR.

I would think that most of those who are interested in obtaining ILR want to become British citizens, and want their children to be British citizens.

And if one has decided to make the United Kingdom home, it's perfectly understandable to want to be a British citizen rather than a "foreigner with rights".

A British passport also gives better visa free travel than the passport of many of the "newer" EU states.