UK proposes to clamp down on non-EU tourist visas

Nick-H

Don't EU citizens have free movement accross all EU member-state borders anyway? I thought they did


It's part of the double-speak political flummery thing: by making a big fuss about immigrants, it makes the country look more desirable, which makes the politicians look more successful. Its a marketing trick.

__________________
.


Just one member of the IndiaMike Mod Team

karuna

OK, well I've had a look at the consultation document, so a little context minus the media spin.

On the 3 month thing. They claim that only 1.1% of tourists on a 6 month visa actually stay in the UK longer than 3 months. However, all are required to show proof that they have the financial means to support themselves for 6 months. That's not fair, hence the proposed reduction to 3 month visas and corresponding 3 months worth of means to support oneself. The document also notes that this is the same time limit as some other European countries, the US, and Australia.

Nowhere do they suggest that the 3 month tourist visa is intended to cut illegal immigration (I'm not saying that isn't their real reasoning, but it certainly isn't trying to play to xenophobes).

On the issue of a financial "bond". The consultation document states that currently the lack of standardised documents required with an application for a family member make it difficult both for the visa officer to ascertain eligibility and for the prospective visitor to prove their family ties. The idea would therefore be to change to a "sponsor" system for families (there isn't one at the moment), like the one used by employers. This apparently would standardise the documents needed to evidence family ties and financial means. But, more importantly, it also would make the family responsible should their family member overstay their visa or work illegally, which under the current system they are not.

They then posit 3 different methods by which the sponsoring family could be made to ensure that the visitor abides by the terms of their visa:
General statement of intent outlining responsibilities [of the family]
Written statement in presence of a solicitor
Financial security

The financial security would only become payable should the visitor overstay the visa.

Note that nowhere does the document mention that the sum in question would be £1000 (if you read the article Mickey linked to it says this sum is essentially press speculation), or suggest that this approach is the favoured option.

This doesn't make the idea of a cash bond any less stupid, but at least you've got the thinking behind it now! Sounds like a revenue raising tactic to cynical ole me.

capt_mahajan

Seems to be also a ploy, as part of the ongoing almost offensive ethos, of politicians showing their constituents that they are keeping people from certain countries and continents out.

Wonder how much this has to do with the recent scrapping (I think it came into force a week or so ago) of some inter EU border controls.

Jasmin

Yes Nick, but the UK is at the top of the list were people from the Eastern European countries flock. Apparently because the welfare system is one of the best. And if this is the kind of thing that the UK govenment is trying to put a stop to, then they won't have a chance with these new laws. They probably will stop the much lesser numbers from countries such as Iran, Pakistan, India etc.. The kind of people who would rather work anyway if they possibly can.

No wonder certain immigrant groups are so angry about the proposal of these new laws. We can only draw our own conclusions.

__________________
'Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome' - S. Johnson

Jasmin

Yes, I agree capt_mahajan.

karuna

Playing to the xenophobes could well be part of it, but apart from suggesting that politicians think that xenophobes are worth playing to which in turn suggests they form the greater part of the electorate (and I'd need to see some evidence to show that the majority of Labour voters/the British population are xenophobes please) that idea just stops the whole debate in its tracks.

Bringing in the word or concept of "xenophobia" is an instant discussion-stopper in a post-Imperial nation deeply neurotic about its past (and we are, don't let appearances fool you). In the main, racism and xenophobia have gone from the prevailing view of the masses to the preserve of vilified extremists (UKIP are a national joke, the BNP are roundly scorned) in about 50 years here, and we're still grappling ineptly with it. Both those words and concepts put the kibosh on any kind of reasoned debate on immigration and get mentioned every single time the "I" word is even hinted at.

I'm not claiming there are no racists or xenophobes in the UK, there are plenty, the problem is separating out their agenda from the real need to examine our outdated, piecemeal laws on immigration in the face of overcrowding, an underskilled (and lazy) "ethnic" populace, the rights of families from countries we once decided we owned to settle here, the moral imperative to provide asylum, illegal migrants, etc etc etc. In fact, I can't even determine what the objective facts are around these issues because the two things (immigration and xenophobia) are so entwined in our national psyche.

Personally, I find the idea of slowing or halting migration to the UK less offensive than this idea that we need new migrant workers (I hate that term, it's so de-humanizing) to do the low skilled jobs us "ethnic" or naturalised Brits are too proud/lazy to do. That seems more racist than admitting that we are a small nation with an overcrowding problem, a less than glorious past and some tough and unpleasant decisions to make.

capt_mahajan

I don't(didn't) mean it is racist or xenophobic per se, and the UK (and Europe) have problems with immigration, sure.

They also need young blood to subsidise their pension plans, in many cases, demographics and birth rates being what they are.

Xenophobia and Racism is hardly the sole prerogative of the British or Europeans though, even where it exists. Similar arguments are propounded everywhere, including in parts of India.
(the outsiders are coming, the outsiders are coming!!)

What I do find offensive, however, is policies being slanted to keep legal immigrants from some parts of the world out. I would prefer an immigration policy which does not discriminate.

karuna

This is true in the UK I believe.

Slightly OT, but I was absolutely horrified by the portrayal of British people when I went to see Namaste London. They were almost all uniformly horribly racist, patronising and condescending about India. PLEASE tell me this was just a Bollywood interpretation and not the prevailing view of us?!

Yes, I would agree you shouldn't discriminate on grounds of origin. These polices aren't specifically about migration though, they're about visiting, as a tourist or family member, with the intention of leaving again. In permanent migration I know EU nationals are favoured as we all have a right to roam, but I don't know about other countries. I DO know that it's super easy for an Aussie to get a work visa in the UK- I bet it isn't so for an Indian. And you're absolutely right, that's unfair discrimination. I wonder how the government defends it? I might look more into it and ask my MP (who's now a junior minister and has never, ever voted against the government once. Crony. )

capt_mahajan

I don't do Bollywood, so I dunno.

But (and not to stress this too much, because there are morons everywhere in the world) I have seen more than a fair share of patronising and condescending from that part of the world.
And I have met some marvellous people too.

Racist, much less.

All of us have our prejudices. It's what we do with them that matters.

shere

Yes they tried several years ago but the bond was a lot higher £8k to £10k I think.

Yes lots of albanians claiming to be from kosovo and Iraqis scared of Saddam. Also lots of people from India (mainly Punjabis). Just visit motorway maintenance and construction sites to see how many there are. Nothing wrong with having them here to work if the local people rather watch Trisha than work on a motorway in winter. It would be good if they had their stay legalised in the UK as then they could get real protection against people who exploit them.

The £1k is not going to be a detterant. It should be £10K and an instant ban on the sponsor from inviting more people over.

At least it is not as bad as the Canadian system. There the whole immigration system is a sham. People manage to get half the village over by marrying-divorcing-marrying over and over again.

karuna

Once more with feeling...the £1000 is just press speculation. The actual government consultation does not specify a sum.

Yes, it's absolutely fine for us to loll around like giant pampered babies whilst some fresh-off-the-boat with a funny accent waits on us hand and foot. Sounds eerily familiar....
/sarcasm

There I agree with you. But I wish more fervently that people didn't think it was a nice idea that they came and did our donkey work for us, or that they were in a position where coming and doing our donkey work for us was more preferable to life in their own country.




ETA. Apologies shere, I posted in the heat of the moment and consequently was quite a bit sharper than I normally would be.

shere

No problem. The fauji (Punjabi illegals) actually quite enjoy it over here. They can use the money they make to build a nice palatial home back in Punjab.

Besides I doubt the chavs in the UK would want to do a decent days work.

Dilliwala

Well-written post by karuna.
Xenophobe/ic is a bad choice of word also for the context below, but here goes anyway:

Let it never be said that I don't give credit where it's due - at this point in time, Britain is less xenophobic about visa requirements for Indians/3rd-world than a number of mainland-European countries (Schengen). What is being proposed, is being done already in almost the same form by Germany for a few years now. So much so that when I applied to go there in 2006, I lied on the form that I was crossing the border (from Switzerland) as a tourist (quite legitimate - I did a few times and back, before visiting the rellies). Had I said I had relatives in Germany who I wanted to visit, I wud have had no end of trouble, not to mention there wud have been no time to get the formalities done, as it was an afterthought (the Germany visit).

Check the websites of the embassies of Netherlands, Austria and Germany in India, to name a few, for visa requirements. I shud add that a lot of this has to do with Schengen, but as it stands their requirements are more "xenophobic" than Britain's.

Nick-H

I hate the "race card" tabloid newspaper politics that I have seen in my country most of my life.

Of course, that other countries may be worse doesn't excuse it --- but thanks for the perspective