5 years for ILR rule implemented

[likewise]

seems you still don't get it, they don't want you to stay if they think you are no longer needed by the country, that is a hardship, but you simply can't use this to argue with them.

why not check the letter to mps and supporting documents on VBSI website?

Mortgage/tution fees are just the tip of iceberg.

For WP holders it is a dicey situation. If a WP holder, after finishing 4 years in UK, loses job now, unless he can find another employer to sponsor WP [which is difficult more often than not] he will have to leave the country with family (dependants)!!! That's great hardship!!!

Suppose A is WP holder and B is A's spouse who studies in university.
B does not need separate student's visa as she is A's dependent.

Now if A loses job, as per rule, B also loses the right to stay in UK. The only way B can stay to convert her visa to student's one. For that she needs to leave UK. Now if she applies for student's visa, that'll be refused as she can't show funding during study (B lived on A's expense).

I'm not saying that B could have lived on dole having ILR. But an ILR would not force A to live UK immediatly and he can easily search for a job (which is easy to get if employer does not have to sponsor WP).

You may argue that A should move to HSMP - however, not all will qualify under HSMP and HO have very funny rules for refusing qualified applications!

I am sure, if you go on asking every person, hundreds of such instance will come out.

Think of those Indian doctors, many of whom even bought houses - now suddenly there are being told that unless they can get WP they will have to leave UK.

[tvt]

Let me reiterate again the issue of increasing the ILR period from 4 to 5 years WAS NOT an issue the government has ever consulted about. Unlike other issues, this point was never open for consultation. The governemt also has never made it clear (until this rule was implemented) that it will be applied with retrospective effect.

There is also an issue that WP holders were previously able to engage in any business activity after four years (as they got an ILR) are now prevented from doing so during the fifth year.

There is also an issue of delayed naturalisation which by law was granted after five years of residence and now only after six years.

[John]

Let me reiterate again the issue of increasing the ILR period from 4 to 5 years WAS NOT an issue the government has ever consulted about.

I am not sure that is right. They did most certainly mention in the White Paper the possibility of increasing four years to five years. However what they did not do was intimate that the effect of such a change would be backdated. And it is that which is so appalling.

mahin1110, you have mentioned that you live in Birmingham Hodge Hill constituency. Any others living in the Birmingham area? I am just wondering whether a demonstration outside an Advice Bureau of Liam Byrne in say a couple of weeks might be an idea?

[nonothing]

Liam is the MP of my constituency. I have written him and he wrote to IND. Yesterday he forwared me the reply given by IND. IND argued the same points as mentioned by previous minister (e.g. no views were received regarding qualifying periods, morgages and tuition fees). However, Liam has asked me to contact him if I need further info. I am giving him an email requesting an appointment. Could anyone give me any information regarding consultation made by government regarding qualifying period? I will try to make some points personally if I get a chance.

Thanks
------------------------

hi, manhin

this letter and supporting documnet might help.

letter:
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?page=l ... mentarians

supporting documnet:
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?page=s ... g_document

cheers

[tvt]

John,

Though they mentioned this issue in the White Paper, only very specific points were open for consultation. The 4 to 5 ILR was not among these points.

[rooi_ding]

With all due respect I think any kind of demonstration at this point in time would have an adverse affect, during our consultation with Christine Lee her team has always said that we should use this as a last resort.

Liam Ryan would appear on the outset to show willing to discuss this issue when he was the policing minister I am sure he will still show willing to discuss the situation as the immigration minister. I think that I best chance is for dialogue before we jump up down outside his offices.

We need to come across as rational and reasonable people and hopefully we will be dealt with in that way, I would suggest that people in his constituency continue to write to him highlighting issues that personal affect them while the VBSI and other organizations discuss with him on a national front.

[supertiger]

I think by now VBSI should have more or less finished sending out letters to all MPs. So hopefully we can start getting some responses from the week commencing 5th Jun. It'll be good if certain amount of them can sign the EDM, however, EDM itself doesn't lead any public inquiry or debate. So what extra push we can give at present? An English friend asked me how our compaign going yesterday, he knows the Indian doctors demonstration but didn;t know any news from us. So the very vast majority don;t know this at all... and HO will not do anything unless they have to... imagine if the media didn;t report the foreign criminal thing, would they make such efforts? Anything else we can do or plan to do while waiting for MP's responses?

[aj77]

tobiashomer write:

but their misguided application of a policy initiative is causing us hardships

John wrote:

However what they did not do was intimate that the effect of such a change would be backdated. And it is that which is so appalling

We have seen some personal examples of hardship cases related to swtiching over to better job,getting a better financial deal and education etc.Everybody will have to change his life plan in the 5th year.Moreover psychological impacts of retorospective implementation would create hardship in the rest of our lives.
Everything is being written in these letters.

http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?page=l ... mentarians
supporting documnet:
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?page=s ... g_document

Anybody who would have common sense and ready to listen seriously can not deny negative consequences of the retrospective implementation on British economy and society.

Sending letters to parliamentarians is one way of creating awareness but still we are lacking media coverage to highlight our problem.Something should be done to get the media coverage

[supertiger]

Another LD MP signed EDM1992: John Hemming!

[rooi_ding]

I think that we should hold back on the media coverage right now. We should wait and see were the discussions go with LR and JR. the last thing both of them want is bad media coverage of the HO and they both know the press want to have negative media coverage (because it sells more papers). We just have to get our foot in the door and create enough leverage. The media is only the third phase of the battle (if used incorrectly it will fizzle out and amount to nothing it has not really helped the doctors to date).

The organizations that have formed from this situation or have already existed are collecting a huge amount of evidence that the press would love to gobble up to show more incompetence in the HO. We must use this evidence to get what we want and then offer to withdraw if from the public domain, so that the HO gets what it wants (a nice clean face)

At the end of all of this we all want to walk away with a good feeling for both sides the last thing we want to do is segregate ourselves from the HO and the general English public. We all still want to feel like we belong here even though at this stage we might want to leave.

[abcd1]

I agree with what said in above post.
HO can't implement what it wants on illegal immigrants. But they can implement what they want on legal migrants!
HO will love the opportunity that somebody is praising them rather than criticizing. So, they may be lenient on 5-yr ILR issue.

[John]

Another LD MP signed EDM1992: John Hemming!

I know John personally and emailed him to ask him to sign EDM 1992. Glad to see he has obliged.

[tobiashomer]

here is an interesting summary with some useful points of view, from http://www.lawfirmuk.net/english/newchanges.htm

VBSI might do well to ry and link up with those folks as well as ILPA..


One of the major changes that are proposed to bring forward is to extend the time frame of eligibility of indefinite leave to remain from four to five years. The intention is to make rules strict and hard for those who intend to settle down permanently which might not have very good results. Indefinite stay has the effect of removing all the restrictions of movement, of working and of utilizing all the possible opportunities available for an individual. An indefinite stay gives a person freedom to start his own business (if not previously allowed to), seek employment (if not previously allowed to), and let him progress in his professional career in his own way. Four years is, in fact quite a sufficient time scale to assess the applicant's professional progress and individual's capabilities. Although it is just one year that has been added to the current time duration but it certainly would not have a positive impact on the prospective applicants of permanent settlement. This could be the only reason of getting most of the potentially beneficial immigrants lose their interest in making Britain their main home. The UK is just looking for the economic benefits that could be obtained through the overseas nationals but at the same time delaying their right to get permanent settlement. This sounds unfair, isn't it? Moreover, this could lead the skilled labour to be directed to other countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc where a relatively short time period of stay is required to apply for permanent settlement.

[chibuya]

My most concern is if there will be further changes sometime next year.

The govement inceases the qualify period from 4 to 5 years and applies it retrosepectively. When the ' 5 years ' strategy first published in March 2005 I consulted with immigration lawyers and home office the answer is this change is very unlikely to affect people already in the country- so I stopping worrying and was shocked when the news broke out about this change.

Therefore I think there is NO promise now that the rules of applying for ILR are not going to be changed further in the next one year!

Please see the link below for some discussion among people who have the same concerns.

http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=8085

In deed the current campaign is to focus on the unfairness of the 4to5 changes, I think it is more important to do something to prevent something worse happening and make our life more difficult.

There are not yet any mentioning in the goverment documents yet- therefore it is better to do something now rather than after something happen.

The consulation said to be finished however i found there is an email address left in the document 'command paper' page 39

163. There will be further opportunities for
stakeholders to engage with us as we do more
work on the detail of the new system and the
timing of any changes, and we will be running
events and workshops over the coming months.
For further information please contact us
on 0114 207 4074 or visit our website at
www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk.You can also
email us at:
pointsbased.comments@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk.

The whole document could be get from http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en ... _Paper.pdf


I wonder if it is a good idea to write into HO to express the concerns and demand them not to make further changes

[John]

Therefore I think there is NO promise now that the rules of applying for ILR are not going to be changed further in the next one year!

I fully understand why you are saying that .... you have been really hurt by the retrospective change from 4 to 5 years .... but IMHO it is extremely unlikely that there will be a move away from 5 years.

Why? Because 5 years is now the recommended length of time in EU legislation. The UK has now fallen in line with that. The chance of getting 25 Governments to agree another change is, well, it is not going to happen.

[chibuya]

Thank you John.

My worry is not the goverment move the qualify period up tp 6,7 or 8 years. I wonder if there are some other underlining propose for change from 4 to 5 years. Thus they could introduce some new system to quality people on their IRL applications. e.g. intoducing pionts systems in the IRL applications??

Because the goverment could not count the number of the illegas in this country also could not stop new EU country's citzen come to work in the UK. Under this background, the govemenr may have to choose to further tighten the control of the settlements. After all if all the places are filled with workers from new EU countries why would they want more immigrants from other places?

At the moment more new EU citzen come to work here than expected. It is true that they mostly fill into manual work sectors- however as whole they still fill into the gaps and there is a limit that how many people this island could take...

Many people accuse there is no consulation for the 4 to 5 changes. But I think in my case and many people around me, we thought this change would never be applied to people already in the country. Thus we did not make any commits after getting an answer from HO or immigration experts as' very unlikely'

I think even there may be very unlikely that any further changes is going to happen. Should we start to contact the HO through any possible route to make enquiries or express the concerns ..

[Hidden dragon]

Some feedback from VBSI's letter to MPs.

See VBSI news:

http://www.vbsi.org.uk/index.php?mact=N ... eturnid=15

[rooi_ding]

the UK has not fallen inline with any EU directive if anything it is moving further away the fire mark that everyone refers to is continues legal stay of which 2.5 years can be counted as a student. I should have qualified for ILR three times already if the UK fell inline with the EU directive. The EU directive is classified as a long stay residency (we have that here it just happens to be 10 years)

[supertiger]

the UK has not fallen inline with any EU directive if anything it is moving further away the fire mark that everyone refers to is continues legal stay of which 2.5 years can be counted as a student. I should have qualified for ILR three times already if the UK fell inline with the EU directive. The EU directive is classified as a long stay residency (we have that here it just happens to be 10 years)

The typical uk government's attitude towards EU is just like what Winston Churchill declared many years ago: if he ever had to choose between the open sea and the continent, he would always choose the ocean....by saying "in line with EU countries" is absolutely a hypercritical disguise. also French parliament has passed first read of the new immigration bill which encourages high skilled immigrants to settle in 3 years, while family union takes 5 years. what a satire!

[pluto]

I agree with Chibuya-

I suggest the below two diretions,

1 seek legal action to against 4-5 retrorespective element

2 take it seriously about the further changes-- maybe should start to contact relavant parties about that ??

[fairandsquare]

I agree with Chibuya-

I suggest the below two diretions,

1 seek legal action to against 4-5 retrorespective element

2 take it seriously about the further changes-- maybe should start to contact relavant parties about that ??

I agree.
We should focus the "retrospective implementation" rather than the "4-5 policy".

[rooi_ding]

For all the new comers, there is currently a campaign born out of this rule change you can look at the site and see how you can help.

www.vbsi.org.uk

[sams]

guys,

I have just spoken to my lawyer about this and he told me to wait another year. he also mentioned that it is impossible to change the rules back.

I have to apply anyway to get the extension. As I understand I should not lose my fees during this transitional period, though it will be quite painful if I do.

Did you recieve any news from HO?

Any other applicants, who applied after 3rd april, please keep us updated .

[chibuya]

I talked to a friend who is a lawyer and he wondered if this 4 to 5 changes could be challenged legally. He suggested that if we could prove that there is such a solid ' promise' perviously it will be very helpful to challege the home office. It should be useful to see what the guidance said in the old application form for HSMPs particularly - to see if there is such a promise of giving PR after 4 years..

Second- I still think we need to check with home office if they intend to make further changes , and force them not to do so.

Last year this time, when the five years strategy first outlined, none of us thought it will apply the new rule retroresptively. I consulted with home office and some lawyers, they all said ' by common sense the 4 to 5 changes should not be retrospective...

So guess now we should not use our common sense but to push some real promises!!

[RobinLondon]

Just to requote from my previous post, the former Home Secretary Charles Clarke wrote to me on 25 April 2006 with the following comments:

...As confirmed in a previous letter [5 April 2006], Mr ... should apply for further leave to remain on the basis of UK ancestry near the expiry date of his leave to remain in order to meet the 5-year qualifying period for settlement. Once he has completed five years in this category, he will under the current immigration rules be eligible to apply for indefinite leave to remain. There are no plans to extend the qualifying period for ILR under UK ancestry again at the present time...

So there is a "promise" in there. But I got a promise from him before, so I'm not sure how worthwhile this all is. But unlike the previous promise, he's covered his back this time with the added words "at the present time". It's all a bunch of malarkey, if you ask me.

Toss me a coin, Home Office. I'll do a song and dance for you. Anything you want. I'm here to please!