Migration Watch UK: News

Family and employment matters – legal notes

1. Abolition of family visit appeals.

(i)   The Crime and Courts Bill had its second reading in the House of Lords on 28 May. Its main purpose is to establish the new National Crime Agency, but among its other miscellaneous provisions are two which are intended to make changes in the immigration appeals system.  The important one of these two is Clause 24, the purpose of which is to abolish the right of appeal against refusal of a visa for a family visit. Such visas are granted for six months and applicants are required to show that while in the UK they will have enough money to support themselves without working and without recourse to public funds.

(ii)   At present a person whose application for a visit visa has been refused has a full right of appeal. The right was removed in 1993 but was restored in 2000. Provision was made in the legislation for charging for the bringing appeals, but this was later abandoned. There were 49,000 such appeals in the financial year 2010/2011 at a cost of £29 million.

To see the full Briefing Paper No 8.62 click here.

Tighten Rules on Foreign Marriage Partners Says Think Tank

A call for tightening the rules on marriages to foreign partners has come from think-tank Migrationwatch (See Briefing Paper No. 10.25).

It comes in the wake of a Home Affairs Committee report which reported on forced marriages among some sections of the ethnic communities; the changes are needed to ensure that young people are not put under pressure to marry.

The numbers given leave to enter the UK are significant with over 31,000 arriving in 2009.

‘Of course British citizens should be able to marry who ever they choose - provided that they make a free choice without pressure being placed on them. The issue runs wider than forced marriages which the Committee specifically commented upon,’ said Sir Andrew Green, Migrationwatch chairman.

‘It is now time to move on from marriages arranged purely for immigration purposes, often under a degree of family or social pressure that falls short of being actually “forced”.

‘Such marriages cause a lot of misery to those directly involved and are harmful, to the cohesion of our society, as many in the Asian community would privately agree,’ he said.

Sir Andrew said a range of measures was needed. The most important was the reinstatement of interviews for marriage visa applicants, particularly in countries with a low average age of applicants. They have been quietly abandoned in recent years as a cost saving measure but this means that it is, in practice, almost impossible to enforce even the existing controls.

The report also calls for the sponsor to be required to have a minimum level of earnings. In addition, there should be a delay of five years, and a check that the marriage is still subsisting, before permanent settlement is granted.

The level of English language required should be raised to ensure that the spouse has the language skills necessary to integrate into wider society and make a positive contribution to the economy.

‘It is clear that there is a huge task to be done in tackling the chaos in the immigration system left by the last government. Our proposals are just one step in that process. They are intended to be fair to those who seek to marry a foreign partner while also commanding the confidence of the majority of the population – something which at present is sadly lacking,’ said Sir Andrew.

Migrationwatch calls for firmer action on sham marriages

From Monday 9 May, the government is being obliged by the courts to abandon its requirement that a marriage or civil partnership involving a partner subject to immigration control must have the prior permission of the Home Office (a “Certificate of Approval”).

Migrationwatch therefore called today for Registrars to be given a new power to delay suspicious marriages for up to three months to allow time for them to be investigated. This, of itself, would be a deterrent to bogus applicants (See Briefing Paper No 8.53).

They also suggested tougher checks when those with marriage certificates applied for Leave to Remain – the second stage of the process. The Immigration Rules require that the couple intend to live together permanently as man and wife without recourse to public funds. In cases of sham marriages this would clearly not be the case.

Commenting, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migrationwatch, said “Sham marriages are a huge cost to the tax payer as they admit the bogus partner to the full panoply of welfare benefits, including housing. The courts have given full weight to the human rights of applicants but none to those of the tax payer. Tougher measures, proof against further appeals, are now needed to deal with the situation that has resulted.

Sham Marriages – March 2010

Introduction

1 There has been a great deal of confusion recently about the government’s powers to deal with sham marriages. Even the Minister of Immigration seems to have got it wrong in a television interview. Briefing Paper 8.38 sets out the full position.....

The BBC Report

5 On 7 January this year the BBC television 10 o'clock news included film of a covert investigation into a thriving business in which prospective "brides" were women from Eastern Europe taking advantage of their rights as EU citizens and the "bridegrooms" were illegal immigrants from outside the EU. The same report included an interview with Mr Phil Woolas MP, Minister for Immigration, who said that, as a result of a court decision, nothing could be done to prevent such a marriage taking place, no matter what suspicions there might be about its genuineness.

6 This was clearly a mistaken account of the legal position but, despite continuing press reports of sham marriages, the Minister has still not responded to an invitation from our Honorary Legal Adviser to correct the position. A fuller account of the relevant law can be found in Briefing Paper 8.13.

Migrationwatch invited to put forward policy suggestions

Following the evidence which we gave to the Economic Committee of the House of Lords, Migrationwatch were invited by a Cross Party Group of Parliamentarians to put forward suggestions as to how immigration issues should be tackled in a way that took account and also tackles the need to preserve the competitiveness of the economy but also tackled the numbers.

In response, they prepared a policy document which, for the first time brings together in one place the case against the very large scale immigration which has been allowed to develop. The Cross Party Group, which was announced today, accepted the broad lines of the document and will pursue its recommendations.

Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007

This Act received Royal Assent on 26 July 2007 and is to be brought into force by the Lord Chancellor in due course. It was introduced originally in the House of Lords by Lord Lester, a distinguished human rights lawyer, as a private member’s Bill, but was adopted by the government and passed by both Houses of Parliament without dissent. The practice of forced marriage has been a social evil for some years, particularly among families of Asian origin. It is important to draw a distinction between arranged and forced marriage. Bona fide arranged marriages are normal in the Asian communities and the Act does not seek to impugn them. There have however been many cases of young women in particular being forced to marry husbands from the Asian subcontinent whom they have never met, as a means of facilitating immigration for the men concerned. The problem has become particularly serious in northern cities with large communities of Asian origin and credit has to be given to Ann Cryer, MP for Keighley, for her campaigning on behalf of the victims of forced marriage.....