5 years for ILR rule implemented

miffedyankee · Post by **miffedyankee** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:32 pm

first2last4......First of all, let me make it clear that I am not a member of the VBSI! It is very easy to say that VBSI has not been productive! These are immigrants like ourselves who have taken the initiative and the time to give this this protest some semblance of organisation and progress. Also, I think helping the VBSI to establish itself is helping immigrants like ourselves and other future immigrants who may be affected by the callous decisions the HO comes up with!

It is very easy to feel frustrated and point the finger at someone, but in my opinion, the VBSI has done something that the JCWI, IAS etc (who claim to be the custodians of immigrant welfare) are not even bothered with.

I am sure that everyone here would like your suggestions on how to proceed at a "good pace"

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:48 pm

Just so that we don’t get distracted and so that we do keep moving forward. I would suggest that everyone contact the VBSI (I do not have anything to do with answering emails or the IT side) ask how you can take over the reins (first2last4 and miffedyankee) and how to start getting the not for profit organization established so that the bank account can be set up so that a lawyer can be paid for so that the HO can be taken to court.

Or use the VBSI to make further contact with the above mention judicial review to see how he can be further supported.

This thread should also be kept alive so that any newcomers can be re-directed to the VBSI were they can be kept informed of everything that is going on.

BadPaul · Post by **BadPaul** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:49 pm

I agree with rooi_ding on the usefulness of VBSI and the good work they have done so far in collecting evidence and building a case against HO on the retrospective change of the rules.

This work will prove essential, I am sure, in any court case, so from me personally, thank you to all of you who dedicated your time and energy on this cause !

Going back on the court case, just a few remarks and an update from my side:

REMARKS:

"Solicitors associated with the BAPIO legal challenge say that a judicial review is being sought on the basis that the home office failed to hold a proper consultation process before introducing the new rule "

BadPaul: Proof can be obtained from a lot of immigration bodies on HO failure to consult on the 4-5 years change of the law ( or failure to acknowledge these immigration bodies written objections ! ).

On top of it, there is no mentioning in the 5 years strategy papers about applying these rules retrospectively! In conclusion, NO CONSULTATION!

Also,non-retrospection is a major principle in English law, if it can be proven that the change is retrospective, there is a big chance of wining the court case.

UPDATE FROM MY SIDE:

The law firm I have contacted confirmed to me that their senior management will hold a meeting tomorrow morning to discuss this case and they will officially respond to my request.

If they say yes, I am going ahead.

BR,

Paul

first2last4 · Post by **first2last4** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:54 pm

miffedyankee,

I dont mean to say VBSI is of no use, of course things look good for long term in context of establishing VBSI for the obvious purpose. I am not against VBSI but for now we should try to give more for our fight against the rule and less to streamline the process for VBSI.

Witness...... a bunch of doctors dragged HO to the court, they never had any VBSI and guess what they nearly have the positive result in hand.

first2last4 · Post by **first2last4** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:57 pm

BadPaul,

We appreciate for your update. Now that looks heartning...

miffedyankee · Post by **miffedyankee** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:04 pm

first2last4 wrote:miffedyankee,

Witness...... a bunch of doctors dragged HO to the court, they never had any VBSI and guess what they nearly have the positive result in hand.

The "bunch of doctors" have an association-BAPIO established a few years back and not formed AFTER the rules were changed like the VBSI was!

first2last4 · Post by **first2last4** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:10 pm

miffedyankee wrote:
first2last4 wrote:miffedyankee,

Witness...... a bunch of doctors dragged HO to the court, they never had any VBSI and guess what they nearly have the positive result in hand.

The "bunch of doctors" have an association-BAPIO established a few years back and not formed AFTER the rules were changed like the VBSI was!

Blame my ignorance for that... but they still have all thier time and focus on the fight and not had to share it to establish BAPIO.

supertiger · Post by **supertiger** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:28 pm

folks, let's not complain VBSI or each other. They have done some brilliant jobs but yes it is a bottleneck for all of us now. None of us have expected or experienced this before and saying is always easier... it is good that Stephen Kong has lodged the case and I have just emailed him for further information, hopefully he can get back to me or us directly shortly then I will report to you all. Complaining is the most useless or even worst thing at the moment, I know we all have been stressful enough during the last few months, who doesn;t? But we have done some hard work, eg. a demostration, our own website, 80 MPs signed EDMs, reports on BBC and Times, etc, we now need link these things together already achieved and hopefully make good use of them. Let's be positive and constructive, as someone's user name here, "nonothing", we need to certify we are something so no complains please, any initiatives welcome. We will go through it eventually.

garichd · Post by **garichd** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:54 pm

And we can't be organized without a organisation..

VBSI is the organisation, which provides us the ground and put us together under single umbrella.

The VBSI team has done Brilliant work, now all we need to do is take it further.

a11 · Post by **a11** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:48 pm

This is probably going to be my last message in this thread, because things have started to go absolutely wrong out here.

Guys and gals! What the are you talking about?
Were you hoping that you would stay at home and watch how 'chinese solicitors' and VBSI will solve the problem for you?

We - both CL's and VBSI have been fighting as much as we can - using the methods we though would be most effective.

And we did have some results.
Don't forget that the only publications in central press (BBC News and The Times) and the only demo were organised by CL and VBSI.
Don't forget that most support you guys have in the Parliament comes from CL's connections.

If the things have not worked as well as you people hoped, it's not a reason to say that CL was just doing a PR.
It just means that the case proved to be more difficult than we thought.
Don't be mean.

How about personal responsibility?

What have you guys done for the campaign apart from these 80 pages of twaddle?

If you have fresh ideas, go ahead turn them into practice.
If you want to collaborate with people who have already done something, you are welcome to join VBSI.
If you don't, you are welcome to do things yourselves.

Don't forget, people at VBSI are the same people as you who wnated to change the things and contributed as much time as they could to do something.

Unfortunately, we have other responsibilities in life as well and cannot fight forever. Unfortunately, the time we invested was not enough to win.

This means that we need help.

However, instead of helping out, you guys just sit in front of your computers and rant.

Unwise, isn't it?

olisun · Post by **olisun** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:53 pm

the thread has come down from 80+ pages to 66 pages

garichd · Post by **garichd** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:05 pm

UK Citizenship and children out of wedlock 05 July 2006

After a long wait The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provision relating to children of unmarried British fathers came into effect on 1 July 2006.

The Government claims that this will bring equality under the law so that children of unmarried British fathers will be treated the same way as children of British mothers. However, there is still some unfairness in the provisions as this will only apply to children born on or after 1 July 2006.

If the child was born before 1 July 2006 to a British father and a non-British mother where they are not married the child does not automatically gain British citizenship. Either the parents will need to get married before the child's eighteenth birthday so making the child "legitimate" and so giving the child an automatic right to citizenship, or an application will need to be made for discretionary registration of the child as a British citizen. It is hoped that discretionary registration which can obviously be refused will be made even easier in cases where the child claims UK citizenship based on having a British father.

The British Nationality (Proof of Paternity) Regulations in 2006 require that as proof of the right to UK citizenship the British father must be named in the birth certificate within one year of the child's birth. In certain cases further evidence may be required to show paternity. For example there may be a requirement to have a DNA test report.

Now, why this rule is not retrospective....?

miffedyankee · Post by **miffedyankee** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:10 pm

A11....I do not think you should give up now. I know you have all worked hard and to give up now will be defeatist. You will understand that a forum is for voicing opinions and you of all should not be disheartened by this.

I am sure everyone here commends you and the founder members of VBSI for putting in your valuable time and efforts to create a vehicle for our protest.

I do understand your point you made about sitting at home and ranting in front of computers and I will therefore PM you my email so that I can contribute actively to any legal case.

I am sure VBSI will stand the test of time and will take any criticism in its stride.

ssi · Post by **ssi** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:24 pm

first2last4 wrote:Not sure how productive VBSI has been, but looks like we are ending up helping establish VBSI instead of helping ourselves.

Helping the VBSI _is_ helping ourselves. I would have never found this discussion thread without the VBSI site, which I discovered just a week ago.

The Web counter on the VBSI site shows 17460 hits at the moment. It's about 300 a day since 1 May 2006. It is likely that the number of hits per day is growing nearly exponentially, like in an epidemic. http://www.statcounter.com/ can help provide tools for displaying fuller statistics/evolution. If spreading the word were the only contribution from the VBSI it would still be of huge value. But obviously there is much more to it. Even if our case is won on 1 April 2011, it will be a great result. It will keep arbitrary rule by the HO in check. Let's work together to make it happen sooner.

a11 · Post by **a11** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:59 pm

miffedyankee wrote:I am sure VBSI will stand the test of time and will take any criticism in its stride.

Thanks, miffedyankee. The problem is that it is really impossible for us the current VBSI members to fight for a year at the same pace as we did for one month and a half. But VBSI _can_ survive and fight at the same pace. The only thing it needs for that is a constant inflow of willing volunteers.
A couple of minutes I already received a PM from one of the members who offered their full support. The more there will be people like them, the higher the chance for VBSI to be fully functional.

a11 · Post by **a11** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:10 pm

One more thing:

VBSI could have had a much higher impact if more people could make it to the demo on Friday, the 16th of June.

I understand that a working day wasn't very convenient for many of us, but that was the only way to engage MPs in the process.
The TV people and journalists from central press were there (because we went to great lengths at sending press releases, making follow-up calls, etc.), but having seen less than 50 people (at times, with a maximum of about 150), many of them were turning round.

So the question to those people who are complaining about VBSI is: have they all attended the demo?
And if they couldn't do as little as take one day off work and come, why would they expect other people to do the job for them?

And guys, please remember, CL might benefit from winning this case image-wise, but VBSI doesn't care about its image at all: we are not earning a penny from it and are not going to. We are purely purpose-built.

ssi · Post by **ssi** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:25 pm

rooi_ding wrote:There is a similar organization in the states called the VSI

Is this the one:
http://immigrationvoice.org/
?

I cross linked this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_voice
with this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_B ... Immigrants

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:51 pm

Yes ssi that is the one, you might consider joining the VBSI yourself. as you seem to have a thing for research. Which is possible the way that the VBSI should be going exposing as much of the failings of the HO as possible so that it can be passed onto a lawyer.

There is a further protest planned on a weekend which would include gathering more public support, hopefully all the details will be on the VBSI web site

ssi · Post by **ssi** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:47 pm

rooi_ding wrote:Yes ssi that is the one, you might consider joining the VBSI yourself.

I tried. On 25 June I wrote to info@vbsi.org.uk :
"I fully support the action by the VBSI. Please let me know if I can
help in any way."

Reply from the VBSI on 27 June:
"we will be in touch with you soon"

I pm'ed a copy to you, in case you are one of the VBSI team.

Post by **Administrator** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:44 am

olisun wrote:the thread has come down from 80+ pages to 66 pages

I tweaked some forum settings shortly before this post. More responses are now displayed per page.

All responses are still in place; none have been altered or deleted.

Carry on.

Admin

pumkin · Post by **pumkin** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:03 am

I am always stunned at how, when a few people actually take the initiative to do something for the good of many, there are always those 'parasites' who, bearing in mind that they also stand to benefit from the effort and energy others put into something, will criticise and b*tch because not enough progress is being made for their liking!!!!!!!!

What is it with Society?? If you want something done faster, do it your bl**dy selves and stop leaching off the efforts of others!! These people who have made the effort deserve your backing and if you are one of those who stand to benefit from these efforts, but are doing sweet fanny all yourself, don't you DARE criticise these efforts. It is repulsive!

Rather kiss their feet and be ever thankful if they do get it right! You owe them your gratitude not your whinging!

arrrrhhhhh!!

Done and said!!

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:31 am

Okay everyone time to take a deep breath

Thank you to those that have passed constructive criticism onto the VBSI

Thank you to those who have given the support that it needs, but for now everyone needs to focus on moving onto the next phase which is possible the judicial review or some other legal route that can taken.

I would encourage everyone to email the VBSI so that the people who look after the IT section can compile a list of people who are prepared to take on the fight and who can take over from us. (thank you ssi for doing this already)

I think the lack of energy on the VBSI part for not putting some transition period in place has now been exposed. However this is not a disaster and a new group of people can still quite easily take over.

I will try to establish a MSN meeting tonight with the old members and any potential new members that wish to join.

So I would encourage those who wish to help to email hotmail address to the VBSI or myself so that u can be included in the meeting

first2last4 · Post by **first2last4** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:42 am

Good step forward rooi_ding.

It seems some people are getting frustated due to lack on concrete progress and it is quite understandable. I hope and wish we are all happy by the end of the day.

vilkatis · Post by **vilkatis** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:10 am

garichd wrote:
UK Citizenship and children out of wedlock 05 July 2006

After a long wait The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provision relating to children of unmarried British fathers came into effect on 1 July 2006.

The Government claims that this will bring equality under the law so that children of unmarried British fathers will be treated the same way as children of British mothers. However, there is still some unfairness in the provisions as this will only apply to children born on or after 1 July 2006.

If the child was born before 1 July 2006 to a British father and a non-British mother where they are not married the child does not automatically gain British citizenship. Either the parents will need to get married before the child's eighteenth birthday so making the child "legitimate" and so giving the child an automatic right to citizenship, or an application will need to be made for discretionary registration of the child as a British citizen. It is hoped that discretionary registration which can obviously be refused will be made even easier in cases where the child claims UK citizenship based on having a British father.

The British Nationality (Proof of Paternity) Regulations in 2006 require that as proof of the right to UK citizenship the British father must be named in the birth certificate within one year of the child's birth. In certain cases further evidence may be required to show paternity. For example there may be a requirement to have a DNA test report.
Now, why this rule is not retrospective....?

This is a really interesting small protocol change ("statutory instrument" I think is the terminology).

See:

SI 2006/1496 British Nationality, The (British Nationality) (Proof of Paternity Regulations) 2006 Into force 1 July 2006

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si200614.htm

Would you please post links/sources for the quote you posted here ...?

The statutory instrument is not very lucid & I'd like very much to read some detailed information on this.

Sorry it's off-topic (mostly) in this thread. I'd be happy to follow it up in a new thread ...

-- vilkatis

rooi_ding · Post by **rooi_ding** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:57 pm

Hi All

The meeting will be at 9pm tonight can old VBSI members also join

Many thanks

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

5 years for ILR rule implemented

A11

Re: A11