United Refugee Organization

Immigration expected to fall because of economy, not policy

frankstevens — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:56:53 +0000

A report, published on New Year’s Day, has predicted that net migration will fall by tens of thousands this year. However, the report also suggests that this fall will be the result of economic conditions and not government policy. The report, Migration Review 2011/12 was published by the independent think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research. The predictions made in the report (detailed below) include that net migration will fall to 180,000 in 2012 but the report is also highly critical of the impact the Coalition’s policy changes will have on this. The report provides summaries and analysis of changes in migration numbers in the last year by immigration category, as well as predictions for how these numbers will change in the coming year. Highlights of these summaries are provided below. Much of the following is quoted directly from the IPPR report. Predictions for 2012 •The government will decide early in 2012 on the settlement rules to determine who is allowed to stay. We expect the government to choose an income threshold of £35,000 for those seeking to settle. Although historical precedents suggest many immigrants who come as temporary workers end up staying, new rules are likely to have a limited deterrent effect on would-be migrants to the UK, though not enough to make a significant contribution to reducing in-flows in 2012. •Net migration – which was just over 250,000 in 2010 – will have fallen to around 220,000 in 2011 (official figures will not be available until later in 2012) and then to around 180,000 in 2012. •Official figures are likely to show that immigration started to fall in the second half of 2011, through a combination of policy changes (in particular on non-EU students) and worsening economic conditions. These trends are likely to continue in 2012 leading to a fall in non-EU immigration of around 10 per cent. •The Migration Advisory Committee will publish its recommendations on revising Tier 2, including the cap for the next financial year. The MAC will focus on intra-company transfers (ICTs), which were excluded from the cap in 2011 and which have risen from around 22,000 per year to 30,000 per year. The committee is likely to recommend either increasing the salary threshold (currently at £24,000 for six-month ICTs and £40,000 for longer-term ICTs) or disqualifying the use of ICTs by third-party contractors, or both. Further curbs on skilled migrant entry, including via ICTs, are unlikely to reduce overall numbers by much more than 10,000. •The government will continue to try to reduce numbers of non-EU students during 2012, largely in order to meet its overall targets. •In early 2012, the government is likely to announce the way forward on its proposals to restrict family migration. An income threshold of around £20,000 could disqualify around half of the roughly 50,000 who currently come to the UK via the ‘family route’. It is very likely that the changes to family migration will be challenged in the courts. •Emigration could continue to decline, or at least remain stable. Fewer people want to leave the UK for work-related reasons. Retirement and ‘lifestyle’ emigration by British nationals – which are highly dependent on UK house prices and pensions – are likely to continue their decline while people feel less confident about the economic outlook. Overall, it is unlikely that emigration levels will help to reduce net migration in 2012. •Asylum numbers will stay around the 20,000 per annum mark of recent years. Summaries of immigration categories NET MIGRATION The report is critical of the choice of net migration as a target by the government: ‘The choice of target brings two risks. The first is that by promising what it cannot deliver, the government, far from achieving its stated aim of taking the heat out of this emotive issue, will instead feed the public’s sense of disillusionment. The second risk is that the target will distort policy choices … the most troubling area, at a time when returning to growth should be the UK’s top priority, are the wide-ranging changes to economic migration. ‘A recent survey by the Migration Observatory showed that the public h2ly support the Coalition’s overall aim of reducing immigration, but equally h2ly doubt they will deliver it, and do not support their detailed policies.’ WORK MIGRATION The report says that ‘non-EU work migration, which has long been declining as a proportion of overall immigration. The number of work visas granted each year fell from 250,000 in 2005–06 to 150,000 in 2009). The cap wasn’t filled in 2011 due to depressed economic conditions, but IPPR remains concerned that it could be a drag on economic performance in the longer term.’ STUDENT MIGRATION The following is taken from the report: ‘Foreign student numbers have more than doubled in the last 10 years, to around 240,000 in 2010. The government plans to curb these numbers substantially, and has estimated that the changes it made to student visa rules during 2011 – including new English language requirements and tougher sponsorship requirements for colleges – have already reduced the number of overseas students by 11,000. Here, as in other areas of immigration policy, it is the overall target for reducing net migration that is driving the changes. ‘Cutting down on abuse of the student visa system is a legitimate objective, but it is fundamentally different from cutting down on numbers. Better targeted action against visa scams and bogus colleges would restore public faith that the great majority of those coming on student visas are genuinely here to study. This would then enable the government to remove students from the ‘numbers game’ generated by the net migration target and to move back to a policy that supports rather than penalises one of our most important industries and sources of future growth and global influence. ‘Our competitors in the international market for higher and further education are going in the opposite direction. Higher and further education is worth £28 billion in exports for the UK each year, according to a 2007 estimate by the British Council, and offers one of the few prospects for immediate growth, with some estimates measuring its potential at 4 per cent per year over the next four years.’ FAMILY MIGRATION ‘Far from being out of control, family immigration is already declining. But ministers need it to fall faster if they are to hit their target.’ The report also notes that the new income thresholds proposed by the Migration Advisory Committee, which are likely to be brought into force this year, are ‘another example of wider immigration policy being distorted by the net immigration target.’ EMIGRATION ‘Emigration reached its lowest calendar-year figure since 2001, at 336,000 in the year to March 2011. Fewer people are emigrating from the UK for work-related reasons: just 174,000, the lowest for five years and down from 203,000 in the year to March 2010. British emigration has been declining since it reached a peak of 207,000 in 2006: the number of British nationals leaving the UK in 2010 (136,000) was the lowest for over a decade, though the very latest estimates suggest this trend may be levelling off.’ SETTLEMENT The report is particularly critical of elements of the government’s strategy to reduce the number of people achieving settlement in the UK: ‘The government wants to turn the majority of economic migrants into temporary workers: they are welcome to come and fill jobs where we lack the skills or people willing to do the work, but after five years the majority will be asked to leave, regardless of the contribution they have made. ‘IPPR has argued that while there is nothing wrong in principle with trying to shift the balance of migration towards the temporary, the proposed approach is the wrong way to go about it. ‘At the very least, any such policy requires a serious analysis of the issues around compliance, incentives, and enforcement – issues which are entirely absent from the government’s proposals so far.’ ‘ILLEGAL’ OR IRREGULAR MIGRATION Given the government’s hardline stance on abuses of the immigration system the IPPR report suggests that little headway has been made. This goes against the impression given by the widely publicised stories of success published by the Home Office and UKBA. According to the report, ‘Numbers of irregular migrants recorded as being ‘removed’ appear to be increasing, but a closer examination of the figures shows that this is not the result of enforcement activity but of an exercise in ‘data matching’, including the e-Borders system, to improve estimates of how many people are leaving voluntarily. Beyond this, the government’s new policies amount to little more than a somewhat gimmicky, and arguably rather unpleasant, ‘shop-an-illegal’ helpline. Perhaps most damning of all are the comments made in the conclusion: ‘The government has itself pointed to the fact that the ‘cap’ or quota on skilled migrants from outside the EU, which came into force in April 2011, cannot have restricted employers, since the quota is far from being fully taken up. It is slightly odd to see a government making a virtue of their flagship policy not actually having had any effect, but the more serious conclusion is that the experience of the cap so far should not be seen as a vindication of the policy for the future. The main reason the quota hasn’t been taken up is the state of the economy: employers just haven’t been hiring. As and when they start hiring in large numbers, the cap may indeed act as a drag on growth. It is vital to get this policy right – balancing the need to reassure the public that immigration is under control with the flexibility that employers need – before we get to that point, in 2013 if not in 2012.

Appealing immigration and asylum decisions from 19 December 2011

frankstevens — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:25:39 +0000

From today, the UK government’s Ministry of Justice is introducing new fees for some asylum and immigration appeals, and changing the way customers can submit their appeals. This new policy reflects the government’s view that users of the appeals system, who can afford to pay, should contribute to the system’s cost. Fees of £80 for a paper consideration and £140 for an oral hearing will be applied to appeals against decisions taken on or after 19 December 2011. These are low-level fees that should be affordable for people who are required to pay. The proposed fees are not set at full cost recovery, but only recover around 25 per cent of the full cost of administering the appeal system. The government considers that it is an appropriate balance between low, affordable fees which enable access to justice, and a meaningful contribution towards the costs of the Tribunal. Applicants who appeal decisions dated 19 December 2011 or later from outside the UK will be required to submit their appeals directly to the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) in Leicester and will no longer be able to send them to the visa application centre overseas that made the initial decision. For more information about this process please see the Ministry of Justice website. Applicants who want to appeal a decision dated before 19 December 2011 from outside the UK are still able to send their appeal to the visa section that made the initial decision. For further information about this process please see the Appeals section on our website. A new online payment facility will be available shortly. This will allow applicants to make an appeal and payment online for decisions dated from 19 December 2011. Appellants must be able to pay using a MasterCard or a Visa credit or debit card or be submitting an appeal which does not require a fee to be paid. Appellants can ask another person to pay the fee on their behalf using their payment card details, with their permission

SIX people, including a child, have died and another 20 are missing after the sinking of an asylum-seeker boat in Indonesian waters

frankstevens — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:28:31 +0000

. Home Affairs Minister Brendan O’Connor said the tragedy occurred off the west coast of Java early yesterday and 46 people had been rescued. He said it hadn’t been confirmed the vessel had been heading for Australia, although that appeared likely. “This is a tragic event which underscores the absolute dire need to put in the strongest possible deterrence to combat people smuggling and to prevent dangerous vessels embarking on a journey to Australia,” he said. Mr O’Connor said too many people had been lured on to unseaworthy vessels to undertake perilous journeys. “This is a tragedy, something that the government foretold. We said that if we don’t put in place the most effective deterrent we would see an incline in the incidence of irregular maritime arrivals and we will most likely an incline in maritime fatalities,” he said. Mr O’Connor said all the advice to the government was that the best solution was the agreement struck between Australia and Malaysia. He said the government would do all it could to work with Indonesian authorities to prevent the departure of vessels like the one that sank. “The Indonesian authorities have been closely engaged with our embassy in Jakarta and the information provided to me and to the government has come through the embassy,” he said. “There needs to be a full examination by the Indonesian authorities. We will await further advice from Indonesia.” Mr O’Connor said the rescue operation was being conducted by Indonesian agencies and Australia stood ready to help. “Every hour that goes by without rescue increases the likelihood that we are now looking for bodies,” he said. Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison described the sinking as a sad occasion. “I fear as further reports comes in tonight the news will only get worse. Whether these tragedies occur in our waters or elsewhere they are tragedies,” he said. Mr Morrison said he would assume the government was doing all it could to assist Indonesian authorities with the rescue operation. “Those responsible for these deaths are people smugglers. They are the criminals in those process. We are dealing with a criminal business. The hand of the law must reach them wherever they are,” he said. This was not an occasion for playing politics, Mr Morrison said. “The Coalition won’t be engaging in that political discussion this evening,” he said. Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/one-asylum-boat-arrives-as-another-sinks/story-e6frfkw0-1226182948398#ixzz1cV0NXfCf

New fund for legal help for young people welcomed

frankstevens — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:38:26 +0000

The Refugee Council today welcomes the launch of a new project that will help children and young people seeking asylum in the UK will in future be able to access the legal advice they need. The Strategic Legal Fund for Refugee Children and Young People (SLF) is a new pilot project to support strategic legal work – that is work that goes beyond securing justice for an individual and makes a significant contribution to law, practice and procedures that upholds and promotes the rights of refugee and asylum seeking children and young people.

In the context of unprecedented cuts to legal aid and the advice sector, the primary aim of SLF is to achieve the best possible outcomes for this vulnerable group. It will do this by funding interventions in Court and pre-litigation legal research for cases involving asylum seeking and refugee children and young people.

Judith Dennis, Refugee Council Advocacy Officer said:

“We welcome the timely launch of this fund that will enable organisations to make a lasting change to the provision of legal advice for refugee children and young people.

“Research we carried out earlier this year showed that the quality of legal advice given to young people seeking asylum is often poor, and with cuts to legal aid, the situation will no doubt worsen. It is vital that young people can access high quality legal help to ensure they are given the protection they need, so we are delighted that this fund will provide an opportunity to improve legal provision from a strategic level.”

The SLF is funded by The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund and is being delivered in partnership with Trust for London. The day-to-day management and administration of the fund will be carried out by MigrationWork CIC.

For more info and details on how to apply please visit www.migrationwork.org/strategic-legal-fund

Court of Appeal has confirmed that local authority care services

frankstevens — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 23:22:39 +0000

Mind is delighted that the Court of Appeal has confirmed that local authority care services, such as counselling or befriending and social work support, for people with mental health problems, qualify as care and attention under the National Assistance Act 1948. The judgment also clarifies that a council will have a duty to provide accommodation to a person who is homeless and has need for such care services, where this accommodation is required to ensure that the care services are effective. This case is a welcome development in the care of people with mental health problems who are not living in suitable accommodation, clarifying a previously unclear area of the National Assistance Act. Mind would like to acknowledge and give thanks for the pro bono support provided by Kate Markus at Doughty Street Chambers.

One week to go on family consultation 29 September 2011

frankstevens — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 21:29:09 +0000

The 12 week public consultation on reforms to family migration closes on Thursday 6 October 2011. The consultation, which has so far received over 4,000 responses, focuses on tackling abuse, promoting integration and reducing burdens on the taxpayer. Key proposals include: defining more clearly what constitutes a genuine and continuing marriage, to help identify sham marriages and forced marriages; introducing a new minimum income threshold for sponsors of spouses, partners and dependants, to ensure that family migrants are adequately supported as a basis for integration – the independent Migration Advisory Committee has been asked to advise on what the threshold should be; extending the probationary period before spouses and partners can apply for settlement in the UK from 2 years to 5 years, to test that relationships are genuine and to encourage integration into British life; requiring spouses, partners and adult dependants aged under 65 to demonstrate that they can understand everyday English (B1 level on the Common European Framework for Languages) when they apply for settlement; exploring the case for making ‘sham’ a lawful impediment to marriage in England and Wales, and for giving the authorities the power to delay a marriage where sham is suspected; working closely with local authorities to ensure that vulnerable people are not forced into marriage; reviewing the full right of appeal for family visitor visas, and inviting views on whether there are circumstances (beyond race discrimination and human rights grounds) in which a right of challenge should be retained; and looking at the operation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private and family life) and immigration.

Deportation flight to Iraq blockaded and stopped

frankstevens — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:47:13 +0000

Thu, 23/06/2011 – 14:36 — Anonymous

On Tuesday afternoon, 21st June 2011, No Borders and refugee solidarity activists blockaded the Harmondsworth and Colnbrook immigration prisons, near Heathrow airport, to stop a mass deportation flight to Baghdad. About 70 Iraqi refugees, mostly Kurds, were due to be forcibly flown on a specially chartered flight from an undisclosed airport at 11pm. A last-minute court injunction forced the Home Office to call it off, so the blockaders decided to end their potest at 9pm, after making sure that the migration prisoners were safely off the buses. The action was an important step in escalating resistance to the deportation machine, in solidarity with the hunger strikers in Campsfield, the rioters in Brook House, the Yarlswood four, and all migration prisoners in their everyday struggle.

Unnecessary immigration appeals to end

frankstevens — Mon, 23 May 2011 14:45:20 +0000

An end to late evidence in points-based system appeals will help stop misuse of the system, Immigration Minister Damian Green said today. From Monday 23 May, tribunals will not consider evidence submitted after an application has been made, in appeals relating to applications made in the UK under the points-based system. UK Border Agency statistics show that around two-thirds of appeals allowed by immigration judges are due to late evidence being submitted. The rules change is designed to end unnecessary appeals and help make sure that applications are right first time. It will apply to all applications made within the UK through the points-based system. Damian Green said: ‘For too long, the taxpayer has had to shoulder the burden of a system which allowed individuals to drag out their appeal by submitting new evidence at the last minute. ‘The changes I am making today will put an end to this practice for good.’ The minister added that this is one of a raft of improvements that will make the system ‘more robust, efficient and cost effective’. The government has already introduced an annual limit on economic migrants from outside the EU, as well as making major reforms to the student visa system. These measures are aimed at attracting the brightest and the best, while reducing net migration and tackling abuse of the system. The Minister announced the commencement of the rules change in a written ministerial statement, which you can download from the right side of this page.

David Cameron immigration speechContinue reading the main story Related Stories Who gains from Cable’s outburst

frankstevens — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:45:28 +0000

? UK ‘failings over visa controls’ Failed asylum seekers ‘neglected’ Here is Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech on the government’s immigration policy which sparked a row with Business Secretary Vince Cable. A year ago, we were in the middle of a General Election campaign. And there was one message I heard loud and clear on the doorstep: we want things to be different. People said they wanted a government that didn’t just do what was good for the headline or good for their Party but good for the long-term and good for our country. That’s what we’re engaged in. Clearly, cutting public spending isn’t popular, but it’s right to bring sense to our public finances. People said they wanted a government that actually trusted them to use their own common sense. That’s the kind of government we want to be – giving neighbourhoods and individuals a whole range of new powers… …scrapping so much of the bureaucracy that drove us mad. People said they were sick of seeing those who did the right thing get punished and the wrong thing rewarded. Again, that’s what we’re acting on. In welfare we’re ending the system that took money from hard-working taxpayers and gave it to people who refused to work. These are the differences we are trying to make – listening to people, doing the hard and necessary work of changing our country for the better. IMMIGRATION DEBATE But there was something else we heard on the door-step – and it was this: ‘We are concerned about the levels of immigration in our country… …but we are fed up of hearing politicians talk tough but do nothing.’ Here, again, we are determined to be different. Now, immigration is a hugely emotive subject… …and it’s a debate too often in the past shaped by assertions rather than substantive arguments. We’ve all heard them. The assertion that mass immigration is an unalloyed good and that controlling it is economic madness… …the view that Britain is a soft touch and immigrants are out to take whatever they can get. I believe the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate and approach the subject sensibly and reasonably. The last government, in contrast, actually helped to inflame the debate. On the one hand, there were Labour Ministers who closed down discussion, giving the impression that concerns about immigration were somehow racist. On the other, there were Ministers hell-bent on burnishing their hard-line credentials by talking tough … …but doing nothing to bring the numbers down. This approach had damaging consequences in terms of controlling immigration… …but also in terms of public debate. It created the space for extremist parties to flourish, as they could tell people that mainstream politicians weren’t listening to their concerns or doing anything about them. I remember when immigration wasn’t a central political issue in our country – and I want that to be the case again. I want us to starve extremist parties of the oxygen of public anxiety they thrive on and extinguish them once and for all. Above all, I want to get the policy right: good immigration, not mass immigration. That’s why I believe it’s time for a new approach – one which opens up debate, not closes it down; where politicians don’t just talk, but actually act. BENEFITS OF IMMIGRATION Let’s start with being open. The British people are fair-minded – and I want them to feel they can be honest about what they think about this subject. Here’s what I think. Our country has benefited immeasurably from immigration. Go into any hospital and you’ll find people from Uganda, India and Pakistan who are caring for our sick and vulnerable. Go into schools and universities and you’ll find teachers from all over the world, inspiring our young people. Go to almost any high street in the country and you’ll find entrepreneurs from overseas who are not just adding to the local economy but playing a part in local life. Charities, financial services, fashion, food, music – all these sectors are what they are because of immigration. So yes, immigrants make a huge contribution to Britain. We recognise that – and we welcome it. PRESSURES OF IMMIGRATION But I’m also clear about something else: for too long, immigration has been too high. Between 1997 and 2009, 2.2 million more people came to live in this country than left to live abroad. That’s the largest influx of people Britain as ever had… …and it has placed real pressures on communities up and down the country. Not just pressures on schools, housing and healthcare – though those have been serious… …but social pressures too. Because real communities aren’t just collections of public service users living in the same space. Real communities are bound by common experiences… …forged by friendship and conversation… …knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time. So real integration takes time. That’s why, when there have been significant numbers of new people arriving in neighbourhoods… …perhaps not able to speak the same language as those living there… …on occasions not really wanting or even willing to integrate… …that has created a kind of discomfort and disjointedness in some neighbourhoods. This has been the experience for many people in our country – and I believe it is untruthful and unfair not to speak about it and address it. OUR AIM So, taking all this into account, I believe controlling immigration and bringing it down is of vital importance to the future of our country. That’s why during the election campaign, Conservatives made a clear commitment to the British people… …that we would aim to reduce net migration to the levels we saw in the 1980s and 1990s. Now we are in government, we are on track to meet that aim. We are controlling legal immigration – having introduced a cap on non-EU economic migrants. We are clamping down on illegal immigration. And we are getting to grips with the asylum system too. The UK Border Agency is now close to clearing the back-log of almost half a million asylum cases. Our action is working. But some myths have crept in – about what we’re doing and the impact our policies will have. There are those who say that whatever measures we put in place, we can’t control immigration significantly. And there are those who accept we can control immigration, but argue that the way we propose to do it will damage our economy and universities. Today I want to take those myths head-on. IMMIGRATION FROM EUROPE Let me begin by addressing those who say we can’t control immigration. They have three planks to their argument. First, they say legal immigration is impossible to control because we’re a member of the European Union. Second, they argue that illegal immigration can’t be controlled either because it’s impossible to properly police. And third, they say that immigration will always be high because immigrant workers do jobs that British people won’t do. Each part of that argument is wrong. Take this question of Europe. Yes, our borders are open to people from other member states in the European Union. But actually, this counts for a small proportion of overall net migration to the UK. In the year up to June 2010, net migration to our country from EU nationals was just 27,000. That’s not to say migration from Europe has been insignificant. Since 2004, when many large Eastern European countries joined the EU, more than one million people from those countries have come to live and work in the UK – a huge number. We said back then that transitional controls should have been put in place to restrict the numbers coming over. And now we’re in government, if and when new countries join the European Union, transitional controls will be put in place. But this remains the fact: When it comes to immigration to our country, it’s the numbers from outside the EU that really matter. In the year up to June 2010, net migration from nationals of countries outside the EU to the UK totalled 198,000. This is the figure we can more easily control and should control. Last week, our new immigration cap for people coming here to work from outside the EU came into force. It means for the next twelve months, we will not allow employers to recruit more than 20,700 skilled workers from outside Europe. And we’ve already shown a cap can work. Last July, we placed interim limits on the number of visas we would give for skilled workers – and this kept the numbers down to under 20,000. Of course employment is just one of the routes of entry and settlement into this country. Every year tens of thousands of people marry into Britain or join their families here. Now many of these are genuine, loving relationships. But we also know there are abuses of the system. For a start there are forced marriages taking place in our country, and overseas as a means of gaining entry to the UK. This is the practice where some young British girls are bullied and threatened into marrying someone they don’t want to. I’ve got no time for those who say this is a culturally relative issue – it is wrong, full stop, and we’ve got to stamp it out. Then there are just the straightforward sham marriages. Last summer, we ordered the UK Border Agency to clamp down on these and they’ve had significant success, making 155 arrests. And there was also the shocking case of a vicar who was jailed for staging over 300 sham marriages. But as well as abuse of the system, there are other problems with the family route. We know, for instance, that some marriages take place when the spouse is very young, and has little or no grasp of English. Again we cannot allow cultural sensitivity to stop us from acting. That’s why last November we introduced a requirement for all those applying for a marriage visa to demonstrate a minimum standard of English… …and we will defend the age limit of 21 for spouses coming to the UK. So however sensitive or difficult a subject it may be, we are tightening up the family route. But by far the biggest route for non-EU entrants into this country has been the student visa route. Immigration by students has almost trebled in the past decade. Last year, some 303,000 visas were issued overseas for study in the UK. But this isn’t the end of the story. Because a lot of those students bring people with them to this country… …husbands, wives, children. Indeed, last year, 32,000 visas were issued to the dependents of students. Again, many of these applications are for legitimate students doing legitimate courses with legitimate dependents coming over with them. But we know that some of these student applications are bogus, and in turn their dependents are bogus. Consider this: a sample of 231 visa applications for the dependents of students found that only twenty-five percent of them were genuine dependents. The others? Some were clearly gaming the system and had no genuine or loving relationship with the student. Others we just couldn’t be sure about. The whole system was out of control the system – and we’re now getting to grips with it. We’re targeting bogus colleges that offer sham courses. We’re making sure that anyone studying a degree-level course has a proper grasp of the English language. We’re saying that only postgraduate students can bring dependents. And we’re making sure that if people come over here to study, they should be studying not working… …and that when they’ve finished their studies, they go home unless they are offered a graduate-level skilled job, with a minimum salary. Taken together, we estimate that these proposals will cut the number of student visas issued by around 80,000 a year. So across all the main routes of entry to Britain – work, family, education – we are taking action, simultaneously. And the key word here is ‘simultaneously’. As the Home Secretary has said, controlling immigration by clamping down on one route alone is “like squeezing a balloon… …Push down work visas and the number of student visas will shoot up. Clamp down on student visas and family visas will spring up.” For years, people have been playing the system, exploiting the easiest routes of entry to the UK. Now, because of what we’re doing, this country finally has consistent controls right across the immigration system. PERMANENT SETTLEMENT But as I said in a speech in opposition, what matters most is not who comes into the country but who stays. Of course there are fair and legitimate reasons for people who arrive here temporarily to stay here permanently. But the figures clearly suggest that many gain temporary entry into the UK with no plans to leave. More than a fifth of students who entered Britain in 2004 were still here five years later – and many were supposed to be coming to study short courses. But the most significant route to permanent settlement is the economic migration route. Last year, 84,000 people who initially came on a work visa got the right to settle here. I want Britain to continue to attract the best workers. But it cannot be right that people coming to fill short-term skills gaps can stay long-term. As the Cross-Party Balanced Migration Group has argued, it is essential we break that link between temporary visas and permanent settlement. They are right – that’s what this Government is determined to do… …and we will consult on how best to proceed on this in the coming months. ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION So this is the progress we are making on cutting legal immigration and clamping down on the abuse of legitimate entry routes. And we are cracking down on illegal immigration too. This is a question of fairness – yes, to the British people… …but also to those who have been shipped over here against their will, kept as slaves and forced to work horrendous hours. So as part of our National Crime Agency, we are establishing a proper Border Policing Command which will crack down on people smuggling. And because of better technology and closer working with the French, we have managed to cut the number of people identified trying to cross the Channel illegally by two thirds last year. At the same time as stopping illegal immigrants coming to Britain, we are doing something about those who are already here. Two nationwide campaigns targeting illegal migrants have resulted in 1400 arrests, 330 prosecutions and 260 removals. And in the six months to the end of February, we collected some £3.6 million in fines from employers of illegal workers. What’s more, we’re closing the loophole that has allowed people who have worked here illegally to get unemployment benefits. Estimates suggest that as many as 155,000 illegal workers might be able to do this… …with some eligible to claim over £5,000 in Employment Seekers Allowance – each year. That’s wrong – and we’re stopping it. We’re making sure that only people who have the right to work here can claim benefits. And we also recently announced that anyone who owes money to the NHS will be refused entry to the UK until they have paid back their debts. So across border control, health policy, benefits policy… …we are taking decisive action to close the gaps that for too long have allowed people to come here illegally and to stay here illegally. WHO WILL DO THESE JOBS? So we can control both legal and illegal immigration. What is required is political will and the drive to make sure this agenda runs right across government. But the third argument put forward by those who say we can’t control immigration is that immigration is not just a problem of supply but of demand. Put simply, immigration will always be high because British people won’t do the jobs migrant workers do. I can see why this argument is made. Since 1997, the number of people in work in our economy has gone up by some 2.5 million. And of this increase, around seventy-five percent was accounted for by foreign born workers… …many of whom were employed to clean offices, serve in restaurants or work on building sites. At the same time we have had persistently, eye-wateringly high numbers of British born people stuck on welfare. But let’s be clear about what our conclusions should be from this. This is not a case of ‘immigrants coming over here and taking our jobs’. The fact is – except perhaps in the very short-term – there are not a fixed number of jobs in our economy. If one hundred migrant workers come into the country, they don’t simply displace job opportunities for a hundred British citizens. Of course they take up vacancies that are available, but they also come and create wealth and new jobs. The real issue is this: migrants are filling gaps in the labour market left wide open by a welfare system that for years has paid British people not to work. That’s where the blame lies – at the door of our woeful welfare system, and the last government who comprehensively failed to reform it. So immigration and welfare reform are two sides of the same coin. Put simply, we will never control immigration properly unless we tackle welfare dependency. That’s another powerful reason why this government is undertaking the biggest shake-up of the welfare system for generations… …making sure that work will always pay… …and ending the option of living a life on the dole when a life in work is possible. DAMAGE ECONOMY Take all these actions together, and I believe we are proving that we can control immigration. But there’s another group of people I want to take on. The ones who accept we can control immigration, but have doubts about what our reforms will mean. The first thing they say is: these policies will deny British business of the talent they need to succeed. That’s plain wrong. Nothing – nothing – is more important to this government than growing our economy, creating jobs and prosperity across our country. That’s why far from simply salami-slicing numbers coming here with no thought to the impact that will have on business, we have thought incredibly carefully about how we can select and attract the world’s brightest to our shores. This was something the last government comprehensively failed to do. Yes, they introduced a points-based system for immigration, where people were admitted to our country according to the levels of skills they had… …but only after being repeatedly called to do so by the Conservative Party. Yet once they put this in place, they failed to properly control it and effectively manage it. For example, Tier 1 visas were supposed to be reserved for only the highest skilled migrants. But the evidence shows almost a third of people who came over on one of these visas were not employed in highly skilled jobs. Some were found stacking shelves in supermarkets or driving taxis – and that’s if they were employed at all. Tier 2 visas were supposed to be reserved for skilled jobs such as engineers. But again, these visas were abused and misused. In one case, an applicant applied as an ‘Elite Chef’ for a fried chicken shop. The main qualifying criterion was the rate of pay. So in this case, his sister, who owned the shop decided to pay him exactly the amount that allowed him to qualify. There was nothing the authorities could do and he was allowed in. So it has fallen to this government to sort out the system – and we are completely changing the way it works so it is truly geared to the needs of our economy. We are reforming Tier 1, to make sure that it is genuinely a route only for the best. As part of that package of reform, we are introducing a new route for people of exceptional talent – like scientists, academics and artists. And we are introducing a new Entrepreneur Visa, to roll out the red carpet for anyone who has a great business idea and serious investment. We are also reforming Tier 2 visas. Business leaders have told us that as a country, we should prioritise skilled Tier 2, workers with a job offer rather than highly-skilled Tier 1 workers without a job offer. So that’s what we’re doing. For the coming year, even as we have reduced the number of economic migrants overall by seven thousand, we have actually increased the number of Tier 2 visas available. And we have also raised the skills level so it is only open to graduate-level occupations – and excludes other jobs like careworkers and cooks. What’s more, we have exempted what are called ‘intra-company transfers’ from the limit while raising standards at the same time… …so firms can still move their employees around the world, but not to fill permanent jobs that could be done by UK workers. So I completely reject the idea that our new immigration rules will damage our economy. DAMAGE UNIVERSITIES The second thing some say is that our policies on student visas will damage our universities. Again, let me make clear: this government will do nothing to harm Britain’s status as a magnet for the world’s best students. That’s why with us, if you’re good at your subject, can speak English and have been offered a place on a course at a trusted institution – you will be able to get a visa to study here. Put another way, Britain’s universities are free to market themselves globally saying: ‘you can come and study here at some of the finest institutions anywhere in the world – and you can stay and work in a graduate job after you leave.’ That makes our country a hugely attractive destination for genuine students who genuinely want to study abroad. What we don’t want is for this to be a hugely attractive destination for people who only want a passage to Britain. So we are cracking down on the abuses of the system. In recent years there has also grown up a thriving industry of bogus colleges, providing bogus qualifications as cover for bogus visas. Of the 744 private colleges on the UK Border Agency Sponsor Register in January, only 131 had attained Highly Trusted Sponsor status. Yet, as of mid-January this year, the 613 private colleges who are not Highly Trusted have been able to sponsor 280,000 students between them. The potential for abuse is clearly enormous. Indeed, we have been looking into the practice of some so-called colleges. In one case, students were sent off to so-called work placements in locations up to 280 miles away from the college where they were supposed to be studying on a regular basis. In another, students were found working in 20 different locations and undertaking no study time whatsoever. In yet another case, there were 2 lecturers for 940 students. Want to know how ridiculous things have got? An Indian organisation which helps people get student visas has put up a massive billboard in that country. It’s got a picture of London bus and the words ‘Get a Free Ride to the UK’ emblazoned across it. Clearly, we cannot – and should not – put up with any of this. That’s why we’re getting to grips with the abuse and that’s why I reject the idea that our policy will damage our universities. It really is simple: if you’re a genuine academic institution – you have nothing to worry about. But if you’re not, you do – and I make no apology for that. CONCLUSION What I have set out today is a sober, comprehensive and effective plan to cut immigration, and cut it substantially. Sober because we come to this debate clear-headed about not only the benefits of immigration… …but also its impact on our public services, communities and society. Comprehensive because we are leaving no stone unturned, taking action across all routes of entry to our country. And effective – because we are doing all this in a way that strengthens our economy and enhances the status of our universities. This time last year, we said we would listen to people’s concerns and get immigration under control. Today I can confidently say that we are getting there. If we take the steps set out today, and deal with all the different avenues of migration, legal and illegal, then levels of immigration can return to where they were in the 1980s and 90s, a time when immigration was not a front rank political issue. And I believe that will mean net migration to this country will be in the order of tens of thousands each year, not the hundreds of thousands every year that we have seen over the last decade. Yes, Britain will always be open to the best and brightest from around the world and those fleeing persecution. But with us, our borders will be under control and immigration will be at levels our country can manage. No ifs. No buts. That’s a promise we made to the British people. And it’s a promise we are keeping.

Human Rights Community in the Iran has been decimated

frankstevens — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:04:24 +0000

Iran: Authorities Attempt to Crush Remaining Active Human Rights NGOs

(6 January 2009) Islamic Republic authorities are attempting to shut down the Committee of Human Rights Reporters, one of the few human rights organizations still active in the country, and to stop the human rights activities of the student alumni group ADVAR, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran reported today. Some members of the groups are being arrested, and others are under intense pressure to halt their work.
“In illegally shutting down independent, domestic human rights reporting, the authorities are attempting to preserve their own impunity before Iranian and international law,” said Campaign spokesperson Hadi Ghaemi.On 2 January 2010, Parisa Kakaie and Mehrdad Rahimi, members of the Committee who had been summoned to the Intelligence Ministry and threatened by telephone, were arrested when they appeared at the Intelligence Office. Activists Shiva Nazarahari, Kouhyar Goudarzi and Saeed Hayeri, also members of the Committee, have been arrested [http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2010/01/arrests-womens-activists/] as reported by the Campaign.

Previously, on 1 December 2009, Committee members Saeed Kalanaki and Saeed Jalalifar were arrested. Kalanaki was arrested at his office, and his house was later searched and his personal belongs confiscated. Jalalifar was arrested in front of his house by Intelligence Officers who were waiting for him. Both are being held in the public ward in Evin prison. Kalanaki was visited by his family once, but Jalalifar has been denied any visits. Previously, Kalanaki was arrested and convicted by the Revolutionary Court to a three-year suspended prison term. Jalalifar was expelled from Zanjan University during the student protests against the alleged sexual abuse of a female student by the University Deputy.

Two other members of the Committee, Saeed Habibi and Hesam Misaghi, have been summoned and threatened by phone, but they refused to appear at the Intelligence Ministry because according to the law, a written summons is required. Previously, Habibi was arrested in November 2007 and released after 70 days on bail of 1,500 million Rials ($150,000) and tried and convicted to a three-year prison term, which has been appealed.

In the week of 28 December 2009, Kalanaki and Jalalifar contacted two other members of the Committee by telephone from prison and requested them to stop running the Committee’s website. After they had spoken to their colleagues, their interrogators took the phone and threatened the members, and said that if they did not stop posting information, they would be treated “either within prison or out of the prison.”

According to the Committee, the arrested members are being forced to confess that they have relationship with the Mojahedin Khalq Organization, which has been an opposition group operating abroad.

The student alumni group ADVAR, which has a unit devoted to human rights violations, still monitors human rights issues from an independent perspective, but the government has [http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/12/anni-advar-letter/] arrested key personnel including members who have studied and worked in human rights. On 2 January, ADVAR members Rouzbeh Karimi, a trained human rights defender and journalist, and Forouq Mirzaie, who is educated in human rights and law, and works in the office of human rights lawyer Abdolfattah Soltani, were arrested. Rashid Esmaieli, a human rights student who was expelled from studying and a member of the Central Council of ADVAR, was arrested in Isfahan on 24 December 2009 while suffering from serious health problems.

The Committee of Human Rights Reporters and ADVAR are among the fewindependent human rights monitoring groups still operating in the Islamic Republic, while numerous leading human rights defenders have been jailed or driven into exile. The Defenders of Human Rights Center, headed by Nobel Peace Laureate Shirin Ebadi, was [http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2008/12/reverse-closure-of-nobel-laureate%E2%80%99s-rights-group/] closed by the authorities in December 2008. The director of the Human Rights Organization in Kurdistan, Mohammad Sadiq Kaboudvand has been in prison since 2007 and is serving a 10 year and 6 month prison term, having been [http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/01/mohammad-sadiq-kaboudvand/] sentenced for his human rights activities. The founder of the Association of Prisoners’ Rights, Emad Baghi, was [http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/12/release-arrested/] arrested on 28 December 2009, and no further information about his status has been provided.

For the latest human rights developments in Iran visit the Campaign’s
website at www.iranhumanrights.org

For more information:

Hadi Ghaemi, in New York: +1 917-669-5996 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +1 917-669-5996 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Aaron Rhodes, in Hamburg: +49 170-323-8314 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +49 170-323-8314 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
This message was sent by: International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, Laan van
Meerdervoort 70, 4e floor Nl, The Hague, NI 2517 AN, Netherlands