All Categories› The Rail

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Foreign spouses could be told to leave UK under plans to cut legal migration

HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
in The Rail

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/foreign-spouses-could-be-told-to-leave-uk-under-plans-to-cut-legal-migration/ar-AA1l36CC?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=c8ad84cb700c461a854f1ef7c203196e&ei=17
· Share on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,597
    edited December 2023
    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft touch and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    TheEdge949 said:

    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft tough and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.

    I think that raising the threshold is silly when you consider the jobs we find it difficult to fill.
    Nurses, care workers, those that work in hospitality, farm workers etc.
    I cant see why you wouldnt just issue visas to those with jobs.
    You can interview using the internet.
    The visa could last as long as the job.
    So a fruit picker could get a visa for say 6 months.
    Easily renewable for the following year, subject to there being no problems.
    A hospitality worker for say 12 months, but automatically renewed assuming they were still in a job.
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    TheEdge949 said:

    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft tough and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.

    We could have a threshold of 150k if we were just looking for brain surgeons.
    · Share on Twitter
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,520
    TheEdge949 said:

    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft tough and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.

    But it will cause distress. Because, despite what the Government claim, there is a nasty retrospective part to this.

    The £38k part us too blunt an instrument. For people taking up new jobs? Can see the point.

    But there are thousands who have already come here, and taken up jobs we cannot fill, based on promises we are no longer willing to honour. Something which no other comparable nation does. If you know that your wife is now going to be expelled at renewal, why stay working here?

    Changing the rules for new entrants is one thing. Changing the rules for people already here is quite another. And will cause major short-term problems in 2-3 years time. When, of course, this Govt is no longer in power.

    It will cause considerable distress. As thousands leave to work instead in countries that do not act in this way. And, of course, to everyone who needs care in this country. Because it is that sector where people will leave.
    · Share on Twitter
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,597
    Not sure that they would leave because certainly care and nursing positions elsewhere offer poor pay and conditions compared to the UK. Hence the desire to work here.

    Also many Countries have much stricter requirements for meeting the criteria to be granted a work visa and much of this centres around the ability to provide for and support dependents.

    If I go and work abroad on a working visa I am expected to be able to provide for any dependents who come and live with me.

    Also one of the great things about living in a relatively democratic Country is choice.

    If the rules change and I don't like them I have options. I can either work out the rest of the visa and leave, I can quit and leave immediately or I could encourage my dependent to get work and see if the combined figure puts us over the threshold.

    Of course if we banned, agencies and zero hours contracts, and instead made companies employ their own workers with proper pay and conditions then perhaps the problem (whatever the Government thinks that is), that this legislation is supposed to correct (however the Government thinks it will correct it) wouldn't be there in the first place.

    The NHS.
    Warehousing and Logistics.
    The Retail Sector.
    Care and Nursing Homes.

    All these would be a good place to start.

    Let me put it in a nutshell. I, and I assume the vast majority of people, have no problem with migrant workers, can't see why anybody would to be honest.
    However, if they then bring dependents over that their level of income cannot support, then I feel that there is then perhaps a cause for questioning whether that dependent should be allowed leave to stay.



    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    Essexphil said:

    TheEdge949 said:

    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft tough and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.

    But it will cause distress. Because, despite what the Government claim, there is a nasty retrospective part to this.

    The £38k part us too blunt an instrument. For people taking up new jobs? Can see the point.

    But there are thousands who have already come here, and taken up jobs we cannot fill, based on promises we are no longer willing to honour. Something which no other comparable nation does. If you know that your wife is now going to be expelled at renewal, why stay working here?

    Changing the rules for new entrants is one thing. Changing the rules for people already here is quite another. And will cause major short-term problems in 2-3 years time. When, of course, this Govt is no longer in power.

    It will cause considerable distress. As thousands leave to work instead in countries that do not act in this way. And, of course, to everyone who needs care in this country. Because it is that sector where people will leave.
    Couples feeling ‘stuck’ because of Government’s ‘cruel’ migration plan


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/couples-feeling-stuck-because-of-government-s-cruel-migration-plan/ar-AA1l4s2K?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=fd84ab74f3e6474d82ff5c3121d8040d&ei=35
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    Thanks to James Cleverly, I may never live in the same country as my kids again


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/thanks-to-james-cleverly-i-may-never-live-in-the-same-country-as-my-kids-again/ar-AA1l5ZmV?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b2f201724d3849a3a9cc3c11782d496c&ei=53
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    UK citizens 'will have fewer rights than migrants' under new family visa rules


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-citizens-will-have-fewer-rights-than-migrants-under-new-family-visa-rules/ar-AA1l6nld?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=d51c49d7da024beca0e49ad32bc48833&ei=57
    · Share on Twitter
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,597
    I feel this is all part of some huge Tory scheme to convince the electorate that immigration poses a major threat to the economy of the country.

    I'm probably wrong, I usually am but I reckon the Government spunked £billions more on HS2 than immigration costs us.

    They seem keen to push that to the back burner.

    The latest conspiracy rumour is that the arriving boat people are mainly young men because they are secretly being trained as a paramilitary force to control the population when they eventually revolt against the political system.., because the Government are convinced that the Police and the Army will back the British people and not their Government paymasters.

    You couldn't make it up..... well actually it would appear that someone has.
    · Share on Twitter
  • Bean81Bean81 Member Posts: 578
    So if somebody earns £20k, they can't bring their spouse over? Even if they immediately start working? Weird if true and not they way to fix the shortage of staff problem in many low paid sectors.
    · Share on Twitter
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,597
    Every Englishman married to a Scottish woman is now hoping they get independence.

    · Share on Twitter
  • stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,768
    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles
    · Share on Twitter
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,597
    stokefc said:

    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles

    I think that people holding certain jobs will be treated favourably. Certainly jobs where qualications need to be held such as nursing, doctors, clinicians etc. I think this is aimed at the unskilled labour market. Warehousing, retail, and the like.

    If it comes to fruition there's going to be either a lot of job opportunities or empty Warehouse's along Stanley Matthews way and Radial Retail Park. Amazon, Screwfix, Pets at Home, GXO, Sainsburys, XPO, Dunelm, and Dee Set would all stand to lose workers.
    · Share on Twitter
  • tomgooduntomgoodun Member Posts: 3,751
    TheEdge949 said:

    stokefc said:

    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles

    I think that people holding certain jobs will be treated favourably. Certainly jobs where qualications need to be held such as nursing, doctors, clinicians etc. I think this is aimed at the unskilled labour market. Warehousing, retail, and the like.

    If it comes to fruition there's going to be either a lot of job opportunities or empty Warehouse's along Stanley Matthews way and Radial Retail Park. Amazon, Screwfix, Pets at Home, GXO, Sainsburys, XPO, Dunelm, and Dee Set would all stand to lose workers.
    The current government plan is to fill those low paid jobs with “ Benefit Scroungers”

    · Share on Twitter
  • VespaPXVespaPX Member Posts: 12,272
    tomgoodun said:

    TheEdge949 said:

    stokefc said:

    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles

    I think that people holding certain jobs will be treated favourably. Certainly jobs where qualications need to be held such as nursing, doctors, clinicians etc. I think this is aimed at the unskilled labour market. Warehousing, retail, and the like.

    If it comes to fruition there's going to be either a lot of job opportunities or empty Warehouse's along Stanley Matthews way and Radial Retail Park. Amazon, Screwfix, Pets at Home, GXO, Sainsburys, XPO, Dunelm, and Dee Set would all stand to lose workers.
    The current government plan is to fill those low paid jobs with “ Benefit Scroungers”

    Or with the tens of thousands of young men currently staying in hotels.
    · Share on Twitter
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,520
    VespaPX said:

    tomgoodun said:

    TheEdge949 said:

    stokefc said:

    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles

    I think that people holding certain jobs will be treated favourably. Certainly jobs where qualications need to be held such as nursing, doctors, clinicians etc. I think this is aimed at the unskilled labour market. Warehousing, retail, and the like.

    If it comes to fruition there's going to be either a lot of job opportunities or empty Warehouse's along Stanley Matthews way and Radial Retail Park. Amazon, Screwfix, Pets at Home, GXO, Sainsburys, XPO, Dunelm, and Dee Set would all stand to lose workers.
    The current government plan is to fill those low paid jobs with “ Benefit Scroungers”

    Or with the tens of thousands of young men currently staying in hotels.
    That could be a plan. But it would need spending tens of £millions sorting out the backlog and deporting some and employing others, rather than hundreds of £millions gifted to Rwanda, while trying to claim that English Law imposed by our Govt is more important than International Law.

    What kind of deluded thinking means this Govt believes that it is the sole arbiter of facts totally outside their control? Rwanda may or may not be a safe country. But the answer is not solely for a UK Govt with a vested interest.
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    Essexphil said:

    VespaPX said:

    tomgoodun said:

    TheEdge949 said:

    stokefc said:

    Pathetic ruling , nurses and junior doctors don't meet that threshold now , how are they going to keep the NHS running when they won't allow/ start kicking out these people
    Utter shambles

    I think that people holding certain jobs will be treated favourably. Certainly jobs where qualications need to be held such as nursing, doctors, clinicians etc. I think this is aimed at the unskilled labour market. Warehousing, retail, and the like.

    If it comes to fruition there's going to be either a lot of job opportunities or empty Warehouse's along Stanley Matthews way and Radial Retail Park. Amazon, Screwfix, Pets at Home, GXO, Sainsburys, XPO, Dunelm, and Dee Set would all stand to lose workers.
    The current government plan is to fill those low paid jobs with “ Benefit Scroungers”

    Or with the tens of thousands of young men currently staying in hotels.
    That could be a plan. But it would need spending tens of £millions sorting out the backlog and deporting some and employing others, rather than hundreds of £millions gifted to Rwanda, while trying to claim that English Law imposed by our Govt is more important than International Law.

    What kind of deluded thinking means this Govt believes that it is the sole arbiter of facts totally outside their control? Rwanda may or may not be a safe country. But the answer is not solely for a UK Govt with a vested interest.
    Rwanda: Tory MPs under pressure to back Rishi Sunak's plan



    On the other side of the party, the One Nation group of MPs are taking legal advice from former Solicitor General Lord Garnier.

    He told BBC Radio 4's PM programme the legislation was "political nonsense and legal nonsense".

    "It's trying to define things when there is no evidence for that being the case. It's rather like a bill that has decided that all dogs are cats."

    https://www.aol.com/rwanda-tory-mps-under-pressure-141855977.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFFBNP5OuHRSU2DE6f2FaOsFE4QK_Ex-XgXsaxvDUOwM4R26XHXuRLLrT5b0ryPBb6yi1gbieXvRFAeKEceSesMg0iYWTqGOajXBKAi7S6r9jLeKt3eMlfZ7MbKRulmSZdsxiMuX7ubYeJBi8vQnQMCSeQ4GQ5fvFR_8B1offjh6
    · Share on Twitter
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,520
    I can see why the current plans have benefits for the PM. Just not for the Country.

    Setting to one side my personal animosity to the whole idea on both humanitarian and cost grounds, the simple fact is that there is insufficient time left to implement this tosh in a cost-effective way.

    It is economic madness. On the bright side, it is leaving the Tory Party looking hopefully divided and weak.

    The Far Right of the Party demanding we cut ourselves off from the civilised standards set by that well known Lefty Winston Churchill need to be aware of 1 very important fact.

    To win an Election you need to convince the middle ground. Not the extreme wing which will vote for you anyway.

    And if you don't believe me, ask Jeremy Corbyn :)
    · Share on Twitter
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 8,878
    Prevention is better than cure......hindsight is to late.. hic !
    · Share on Twitter
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,055
    Essexphil said:

    TheEdge949 said:

    Here we go we change our rules to be less of a soft tough and its hue and cry.

    Maybe £38k is a little high but certainly £18k is way too low. You bring your spouse to this Country you should support her.

    Oh and who are these "experts" claiming it's causing distress. Really, within 12 hours of the announcement.

    Two definitions of expert,

    !, somebody who claims to know what he is talking about.

    2, Ex = has been and Spurt = a drip under pressure.

    But it will cause distress. Because, despite what the Government claim, there is a nasty retrospective part to this.

    The £38k part us too blunt an instrument. For people taking up new jobs? Can see the point.

    But there are thousands who have already come here, and taken up jobs we cannot fill, based on promises we are no longer willing to honour. Something which no other comparable nation does. If you know that your wife is now going to be expelled at renewal, why stay working here?

    Changing the rules for new entrants is one thing. Changing the rules for people already here is quite another. And will cause major short-term problems in 2-3 years time. When, of course, this Govt is no longer in power.

    It will cause considerable distress. As thousands leave to work instead in countries that do not act in this way. And, of course, to everyone who needs care in this country. Because it is that sector where people will leave.
    Ministers climb down on plans to make Brits earn £38,000 to bring their spouse to UK


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/ministers-climb-down-on-plans-to-make-brits-earn-38-000-to-bring-their-spouse-to-uk/ar-AA1lRsp5?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=46a2de8ab43c48e1b7c069d508d9f5c4&ei=66
    · Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.