I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
Evening all. Its the sort of rhetoric which will start to turn away the Centre Right grey vote in droves. Most of them didnt sign up for rounding up settled immigrants. The country is losing its damn mind
Nonsense, it's just not renewing visas worded poorly. Anyone who came on an unskilled worker visa should not have it renewed and they should be told to return to their home country. Everyone who came on a skilled worker visa should now have to meet the new higher income threshold or face visa revocation and return to their home country. Three million migrants and dependents are in the pipeline for citizenship, if they get it there's a lifetime of welfare the rest of us need to pay for because they will never make enough contributions over their working lives to make the numbers work. There's £300bn or so of welfare liability we're inviting unnecessarily, we don't have to give them citizenship, they can be asked to return to their home countries.
The article says, "The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria". If you have permanent residency, you don't need to renew a visa, so, no, it's not "just not renewing visas worded poorly".
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
It is harsher than Kemi's policy but more or less does the same thing.
I wonder why Farage has thought going this far was necessary? He could have just said tougher on immigration, higher requirements for new visas, tough on illegal working and removal of illegals. That gets him all the votes he will get from the tough on immigration crowd. Going all AFD seems like only has downsides.
Isn't it like the Brexit bus?
The objective is to get everyone to talk about immigration for a week and for Farage to be cemented as the only person willing to be tough on it.
If the next general election becomes a quasi-referendum on immigration, with only Farage on the "be very tough" side of the argument, then doesn't he win?
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
Wait! @MaxPB said this was all about not renewing visas! I think someone has made a mistake.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
What has it got to do with their country of origin whether they want to belong to a new country?
The telegraph’s framing of this is deliberately provocative
No “British subjects” are being sent home. Calm down
That’s because there’s been no such thing since 1981. They are sending “home” people who’ve lived here for years, decades, married British citizens, had kids in this country, and for whatever reason can't/won’t naturalise. It’s Windrush on speed.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
The telegraph’s framing of this is deliberately provocative
No “British subjects” are being sent home. Calm down
That’s because there’s been no such thing since 1981. They are sending “home” people who’ve lived here for years, decades, married British citizens, had kids in this country, and for whatever reason can't/won’t naturalise. It’s Windrush on speed.
Windrush on speed is correct.
I actually support the Badenoch proposal to extend ILR to 10 years before citizenship. This Reform proposal is would be hugely disruptive.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
It will be interesting who if anybody on this forum supports this divisive and hateful policy
Reform's achilles heel is as a group at the top they can't stop themselves drinking the American alt-right Trump 2.0 kool aid and thinking we can do that in the UK.
Totally agree, its a hateful and divisive policy and it beggers belief that we in the UK would ever punish or cause fear to those that have followed the rules when they came here to work or settled here and made the UK their home.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
It will be interesting who if anybody on this forum supports this divisive and hateful policy
Reform's achilles heel is as a group at the top they can't stop themselves drinking the American alt-right Trump 2.0 kool aid and thinking we can do that in the UK.
Totally agree, its a hateful and divisive policy and it beggers belief that we in the UK would ever punish or cause fear to those that have followed the rules when they came here to work or settled here and made the UK their home.
This isn’t the proposed Reform policy. AFAICS
This looks like a paper seeking headlines framing a policy in a way to get clicks. It’s been known
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
It is harsher than Kemi's policy but more or less does the same thing.
The sensationalism around this is deeply stupid.
You don't think the state retroactively changing the rules is a bad thing? That's the sort of thing you normally abhor.
Off all topics, is there a more satisfying single thing than a freshly dropped conker?
I saw a sixty-something couple collecting conkers earlier. I stopped to chat and she claimed they keep away spiders.
She seemed non-plussed when I said I like spiders*.
Who is the weirdo here?
* last year I had a spider colony in my car, with cobwebs around mirror and windscreen. I had loaded the car one night with shrub cuttings for the tip, and they colonised it. Passengers would occasionally be surprised by spiders dropping down while driving.
At least you now know not to collect conkers.
I wasn't, much as I think them an item of beauty. I think it a folk belief without grounding in reality.
I recall if you had a 23er and beat a 25er it'd become a 48er. They were the rules.
That's how it was round my way. I found it quite unsatisfactory and thought it bigged up the conkers unnecesarily. This was probably a clue to my tastes and tempers as an adult.
A conker fell on my windscreen while driving the other day. "Thing of beauty" was not the first thing in my mind. But in general I agree with MM's point.
I also didn’t like it. Eg a conker could be facing a 62er on its debut and the veteran might be on its last legs and easy to beat. So that merits becoming a 63er with just one win? No. Not for me. But that's how it was. No use railing against it. What I can't remember is how it was all policed. How could you know for sure that a 62er was a 62er? There must have been a system. Too important not to have been.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
One of the many people I know who would be directly affected by this is a German who plays the Last Post on the trumpet at our annual Remembrance Sunday service.
This fact is one of many reasons why I love this country so much and have no plans to vote Reform.
The totemic nature of the Boriswave is due to the unusual size of its unique coalition: angry brexiteers, who feel betrayed; and remainers who (majority) are against it because it annoys brexiteers or (minority) because they prefer poles to philippinos.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
It will be interesting who if anybody on this forum supports this divisive and hateful policy
Reform's achilles heel is as a group at the top they can't stop themselves drinking the American alt-right Trump 2.0 kool aid and thinking we can do that in the UK.
Totally agree, its a hateful and divisive policy and it beggers belief that we in the UK would ever punish or cause fear to those that have followed the rules when they came here to work or settled here and made the UK their home.
This isn’t the proposed Reform policy. AFAICS
This looks like a paper seeking headlines framing a policy in a way to get clicks. It’s been known
So let’s see. Take a chill pill Jill
The bottom half of the article is an opinion piece by Zia Yusuf giving the policy in their own words.
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
What has it got to do with their country of origin whether they want to belong to a new country?
Good question. But that is the law in many countries whose citizens give a lot to this country.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
One of the many people I know who would be directly affected by this is a German who plays the Last Post on the trumpet at our annual Remembrance Sunday service.
This fact is one of many reasons why I love this country so much and have no plans to vote Reform.
Well it would affect my husband but all he'd have to do is quickly fork out the grand for his citizenship. It would just piss a lot of people off.
I think this is the line he crosses where he loses a lot of Brits.
He should start with immigrants of a Huguenot ancestry.
Start with the Saxons, Anglos and the Vikings. Cut it off at the root.
What about the Celts? What about the neolithic farmers? The neolithic farmers, with their new-fangled ideas of farming, were the big problem.
Utter bastards. They ruined everything.
When I was a lad, you knapped a piece of flint, you ground some acorns up to flour, and you were happy. Why do we need to put seeds in the ground? It's unnatural.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
It will be interesting who if anybody on this forum supports this divisive and hateful policy
Reform's achilles heel is as a group at the top they can't stop themselves drinking the American alt-right Trump 2.0 kool aid and thinking we can do that in the UK.
Totally agree, its a hateful and divisive policy and it beggers belief that we in the UK would ever punish or cause fear to those that have followed the rules when they came here to work or settled here and made the UK their home.
This isn’t the proposed Reform policy. AFAICS
This looks like a paper seeking headlines framing a policy in a way to get clicks. It’s been known
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
What has it got to do with their country of origin whether they want to belong to a new country?
Good question. But that is the law in many countries whose citizens give a lot to this country.
I have Chinese friends (dual citizenship not allowed) who simply don't tell China they have a British passport. And make sure only to use the Chinese one when entering China. And they have to be very careful on social media.
I wonder why Farage has thought going this far was necessary? He could have just said tougher on immigration, higher requirements for new visas, tough on illegal working and removal of illegals. That gets him all the votes he will get from the tough on immigration crowd. Going all AFD seems like only has downsides.
He's taking a punt that the fabled "tolerant decent British people" are just that - a fable. And given he's a shrewd operator it's a worrying development. Course I hope it's hubristic overreach and blows up in his face but I wouldn't bank on it. Other possibility? ... well it's the Telegraph, isn't it. So, you know.
The telegraph’s framing of this is deliberately provocative
No “British subjects” are being sent home. Calm down
That’s because there’s been no such thing since 1981. They are sending “home” people who’ve lived here for years, decades, married British citizens, had kids in this country, and for whatever reason can't/won’t naturalise. It’s Windrush on speed.
Anyone can naturalise. They may have to give up their home citizenship, but if you live in the UK I don't see why that should be a problem
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
I just read the actual Reform article. Unlike the rest of you
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have an “indefinite leave to remain” category which is exactly the same thing.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
Wait! @MaxPB said this was all about not renewing visas! I think someone has made a mistake.
Good luck getting Max to ever admit he's made a mistake.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
It's possible this won't count as welfare because the state pension is a contributory benefit
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have indefinite leave to remain. How is that not a permanent resident category?
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have an “indefinite leave to remain” category which is exactly the same thing.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It would be no more 'cruel, offensive, self-defeating' for a country to get rid of migrant workers who had proved unsatisfactory than it would be for an organisation to get rid of workers who had proved unsatisfactory.
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
I just read the actual Reform article. Unlike the rest of you
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It's not self defeating. What would be self defeating is allowing the 3m from the boriswave to get citizenship. That's the path to nation bankruptcy. I don't agree with getting rid of ILR or a pathway to citizenship from immigration but the bar should be substantially higher than it currently is.
Right now an unskilled worker who arrived in 2022 on £22k per year with 4 dependents is in line to citizenship in 3 to 4 years for all 5 of them with all of the resulting welfare claims. It's simply not sustainable and we can currently ask them to go home by revoking their visa or making it non-renewable. There are probably 2-3m in that bracket that Boris allowed into the country that should not have been invited.
I have no problem with revoking visas, maybe even ILR for people who were came from that bracket. I would have an issue with closing off citizenship from migration though, I don't think that serves the nation at all. I do think that citizenship should require a person to be self-sufficient and have a 10 year history of substantial tax contributions (£150k over a 10 year period, more with dependents?) and a spotless criminal record, not even fare evasion.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It would be no more 'cruel, offensive, self-defeating' for a country to get rid of migrant workers who had proved unsatisfactory than it would be for an organisation to get rid of workers who had proved unsatisfactory.
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
But that policy would get rid of everyone with indefinite leave to remain regardless of whether they are 'satisfactory' or not. Many would just stump up the fee to get their citizenship but it would be very unfair on those who want to remain citizenship of a country that doesn't recognise dual citizenship.
I just read the actual Reform article. Unlike the rest of you
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
It says the party will rescind retrospectively.
So how is that "just" the Boriswave?
Because by the time 2029 rolls around more than half of them wi have ILR unless the government extends it to 10 years as they promised but have failed to deliver.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
The Tele says that Reform's policy will be to allow people to apply for British citizenship after 7 years (not sure what current policy is)
It's currently usually 5, but it depends on the category. Spouses have to have lived in the UK for 3 years and then they can apply. You can get indefinite leave to remain after 5 years, but then need another year before you can apply for citizenship.
I wonder why Farage has thought going this far was necessary? He could have just said tougher on immigration, higher requirements for new visas, tough on illegal working and removal of illegals. That gets him all the votes he will get from the tough on immigration crowd. Going all AFD seems like only has downsides.
He's taking a punt that the fabled "tolerant decent British people" are just that - a fable. And given he's a shrewd operator it's a worrying development. Course I hope it's hubristic overreach and blows up in his face but I wouldn't bank on it. Other possibility? ... well it's the Telegraph, isn't it. So, you know.
Modelled on Trump. Politics being dominated by immigration is catnip for populist right. The object is to drown out other issues, and provoke response from leftists. Everyone else a bystander.
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have an “indefinite leave to remain” category which is exactly the same thing.
Er no. Leave to remain is deliberately tongue-in-cheek. You can stay... For a while... Unless we decide not to. It approximates to permanent residency, but is not the same
On the other hand, I think we should have a concept of earning citizenship. If you have lived here for a certain length of time, have supported yourself and not claimed benefits, can speak the language, you should be granted citizenship for the payment of a small administrative fee
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It's not self defeating. What would be self defeating is allowing the 3m from the boriswave to get citizenship. That's the path to nation bankruptcy. I don't agree with getting rid of ILR or a pathway to citizenship from immigration but the bar should be substantially higher than it currently is.
Right now an unskilled worker who arrived in 2022 on £22k per year with 4 dependents is in line to citizenship in 3 to 4 years for all 5 of them with all of the resulting welfare claims. It's simply not sustainable and we can currently ask them to go home by revoking their visa or making it non-renewable. There are probably 2-3m in that bracket that Boris allowed into the country that should not have been invited.
I have no problem with revoking visas, maybe even ILR for people who were came from that bracket. I would have an issue with closing off citizenship from migration though, I don't think that serves the nation at all. I do think that citizenship should require a person to be self-sufficient and have a 10 year history of substantial tax contributions (£150k over a 10 year period, more with dependents?) and a spotless criminal record, not even fare evasion.
I agree, which is why I support the Badenoch proposal.
I don’t support mass deportations though, which is what this policy amounts to.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
It will be interesting who if anybody on this forum supports this divisive and hateful policy
Reform's achilles heel is as a group at the top they can't stop themselves drinking the American alt-right Trump 2.0 kool aid and thinking we can do that in the UK.
Totally agree, its a hateful and divisive policy and it beggers belief that we in the UK would ever punish or cause fear to those that have followed the rules when they came here to work or settled here and made the UK their home.
This isn’t the proposed Reform policy. AFAICS
This looks like a paper seeking headlines framing a policy in a way to get clicks. It’s been known
So let’s see. Take a chill pill Jill
Its been a long time since you told me to take a chill pill, but Zia Yusuf has clearly chosen to launch this Reform policy in the Telegraph tonight.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It would be no more 'cruel, offensive, self-defeating' for a country to get rid of migrant workers who had proved unsatisfactory than it would be for an organisation to get rid of workers who had proved unsatisfactory.
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
What does unsatisfactory mean ? . So if you’ve worked payed taxes you’re now going to be told we’ve suddenly decided to increase what salary you need and kick you out .
Reform have shown their true colours and are a bunch of loathsome cxnts . What started out as their combatting illegal migrants is now going after those who did the right thing . What group will be next ?
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It would be no more 'cruel, offensive, self-defeating' for a country to get rid of migrant workers who had proved unsatisfactory than it would be for an organisation to get rid of workers who had proved unsatisfactory.
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
But that's not what this new Reform UK policy is doing.
There are migrant workers who have proved satisfactory and have thus been given indefinite leave to remain. If they had proved unsatisfactory, their work visas would not have been renewed and they wouldn't have obtained ILR.
Reform UK want to go back on that and retroactively impose different rules, stripping away people's ILR. They are proposing the state re-write the terms of an agreement after the fact.
A project the European defence initiative should be funding. (And if not, our government should just tell RR to do it, and they'll buy the first 10k units off the production line.)
..Even more problematic, European industry does not have an indigenous mini turbofan to offer.
While European engine makers, including Safran, MTU, and Rolls-Royce, build or contribute to turbofan engines for aircraft, none have gone through the process of miniaturization.
Miniature turbofans are not a sexy product. They are almost too easy - you can buy them online.
Yes, jet powered RC aircraft have been a thing for quite a while. Some will do 200mph, which makes them, er, interesting.
Not much range for hitting Moscow tho'
The Iranian drones are simply the largest size of model aircraft. See some of the madder American projects - such as a B-36 model that darkens the sky....
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
And when they reach state pension age?
It is harsher than Kemi's policy but more or less does the same thing.
The sensationalism around this is deeply stupid.
You don't think the state retroactively changing the rules is a bad thing? That's the sort of thing you normally abhor.
I don't see how it is different to any other change in policy. All changes in policy alter entitlements. Both Kemi's Tories and Nigel's Reformers have realised that the accession of hundreds of thousands of migrants to ILR represents a vast and unaffordable liability to the state. It is 'grown ups in the room' stuff to propose policies to deal with that, even if those policies divide opinion. It is not grown up government to bury ones' head in the ground and ignore a ticking fiscal timebomb. Either Starmer wants to bankrupt the country (not a terrible working theory) or he's just too shit to realise this is happening and too arrogant to see that Kemi and Farage have a point.
"Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have an “indefinite leave to remain” category which is exactly the same thing.
Er no. Leave to remain is deliberately tongue-in-cheek. You can stay... For a while... Unless we decide not to. It approximates to permanent residency, but is not the same
On the other hand, I think we should have a concept of earning citizenship. If you have lived here for a certain length of time, have supported yourself and not claimed benefits, can speak the language, you should be granted citizenship for the payment of a small administrative fee
That’s exactly the same as permanent residency in most cases in most countries. It’s also known as “settled status” here. You breach the rules then it can be removed. My wife had ILR and I’ve looked into permanent residency in the States. I’m also involved in advising employers on their overseas employees’ right to work and supervise immigration paralegals. So, from some considerable experience, they’re much the same.
Right wingers need to figure it out. Either I’m a lawyer good enough to be abused on Twitter/X for being involved (tangentially) in immigration law or I don’t know what I’m taking about. Pick a lane.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It's not self defeating. What would be self defeating is allowing the 3m from the boriswave to get citizenship. That's the path to nation bankruptcy. I don't agree with getting rid of ILR or a pathway to citizenship from immigration but the bar should be substantially higher than it currently is.
Right now an unskilled worker who arrived in 2022 on £22k per year with 4 dependents is in line to citizenship in 3 to 4 years for all 5 of them with all of the resulting welfare claims. It's simply not sustainable and we can currently ask them to go home by revoking their visa or making it non-renewable. There are probably 2-3m in that bracket that Boris allowed into the country that should not have been invited.
I have no problem with revoking visas, maybe even ILR for people who were came from that bracket. I would have an issue with closing off citizenship from migration though, I don't think that serves the nation at all. I do think that citizenship should require a person to be self-sufficient and have a 10 year history of substantial tax contributions (£150k over a 10 year period, more with dependents?) and a spotless criminal record, not even fare evasion.
I agree, which is why I support the Badenoch proposal.
I don’t support mass deportations though, which is what this policy amounts to.
Well I think either one would result in around 2m migrants having to return to their home countries so you do support mass deportation at some level. Ultimately immigration should be beneficial to the nation, not incur hundreds of billions in welfare liability for the existing citizens and this and the Tory policy is a recognition of that.
There does need to be something done, maybe this isn't the right policy but it will probably end up looking very much like what Kemi has talked about anyway once all of the practicalities of revoking ILR from someone who's had it for 20 years has been worked out. Though I also think ILR should have an upper limit of maybe 10 years before applying for citizenship is required. It may make for some tough decisions though for people who come from countries that don't recognise dual nationality.
A project the European defence initiative should be funding. (And if not, our government should just tell RR to do it, and they'll buy the first 10k units off the production line.)
..Even more problematic, European industry does not have an indigenous mini turbofan to offer.
While European engine makers, including Safran, MTU, and Rolls-Royce, build or contribute to turbofan engines for aircraft, none have gone through the process of miniaturization.
Miniature turbofans are not a sexy product. They are almost too easy - you can buy them online.
Yes, jet powered RC aircraft have been a thing for quite a while. Some will do 200mph, which makes them, er, interesting.
Not much range for hitting Moscow tho'
The Iranian drones are simply the largest size of model aircraft. See some of the madder American projects - such as a B-36 model that darkens the sky....
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Kite flying, I suspect, and will not make the manifesto.
Everyone says allowing so many immigrants to come as part of the Boriswave was a disaster, including our current PM. All Reform suggest here is not letting them stay.
The amount of times Zia Yusuf mentions ‘Boriswave’ in the article indicates there’s not going to be a way for the ex PM to do a deal with Reform
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Kite flying, I suspect, and will not make the manifesto.
Everyone says allowing so many immigrants to come as part of the Boriswave was a disaster, including our current PM. All Reform suggest here is not letting them stay.
The amount of times Zia Yusuf mentions ‘Boriswave’ in the article indicates there’s not going to be a way for the ex PM to do a deal with Reform
That is not all the Reform are suggesting here. They want to rescind indefinite leave to remain from everyone who has it, and everyone who has it came before the Boriswave.
Phillipson hinting on two child cap being lifted was such desperate measure from a candidate getting thrashed.
The Labour Party proves this week why it is not a fit party for office. A deputy leadership contest reduced to a simple question “what do you think of Starmer and his governments performance?” Union Pay Masters and Labour members installing Useless Lucy as Deputy Leader ahead of Brigitte Phillipson, proving they are clueless how PARTY SPLIT AND AT WAR WITH ITSELF plays and plays to sell out audiences for the next 4 years. Party’s split and at war with itself can never win. 😁
If Labour do borrow SIX BILLION more each year to lift the 2 child cap, they will shred their economic credibility for the next twenty years.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Kite flying, I suspect, and will not make the manifesto.
Everyone says allowing so many immigrants to come as part of the Boriswave was a disaster, including our current PM. All Reform suggest here is not letting them stay.
The amount of times Zia Yusuf mentions ‘Boriswave’ in the article indicates there’s not going to be a way for the ex PM to do a deal with Reform
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
Nobody is arguing that a country is not “entitled”. Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
It would be no more 'cruel, offensive, self-defeating' for a country to get rid of migrant workers who had proved unsatisfactory than it would be for an organisation to get rid of workers who had proved unsatisfactory.
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
But that's not what this new Reform UK policy is doing.
There are migrant workers who have proved satisfactory and have thus been given indefinite leave to remain. If they had proved unsatisfactory, their work visas would not have been renewed and they wouldn't have obtained ILR.
Reform UK want to go back on that and retroactively impose different rules, stripping away people's ILR. They are proposing the state re-write the terms of an agreement after the fact.
Many workers prove satisfactory but there's no longer any need for them.
That's not to say they should be got rid of but as circumstances change so do requirements.
Though, in reality, inertia affects how changes are applied.
A Reform government might say it wanted to get rid of X people, it might even try to get rid of X people but getting rid of, say, 50k non-British NHS workers would be almost impossible in practice.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
If you have paid your way, it shouldn't be down to length of stay per se
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
If the Reform policy is as @MaxPB describes - rather than the Telegraph framing of it - then I entirely support it
The Boriswave has to go home. En masse
Oh do stop it.
Er, why? I support sending home the vast majority of the Boriswave migrants. It was an insane mistake
You can't treat 1m+ people as a lumpen mass. 'Boriswave must go' is dehumanising. Besides, who are we to be casually demanding stuff like this? The only difference between me and you and someone from Somalia is where our mothers happened to be when we said hello world. Pure dumb luck in other words. We've done nothing to 'earn' the privilege of living in the UK. Certainly none of these Reform numbskulls have. And yet they're happy to go around saying 'we' should kick millions of people out of the country because they weren't born here. It's gross. Stop the boats, yes. Control immigration, yes. Tighten the rules on asylum, yes. But all of this? No. It's truly offensive to hear.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
I just read the actual Reform article. Unlike the rest of you
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
It says the party will rescind retrospectively.
So how is that "just" the Boriswave?
Will it not need to be retrospective to deal with the Boris wave if the normal electoral cycle persists?
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
You’re fighting a losing battle as the Reform fan club are desperately trying to condone a policy which is despicable. If Reform simply said it would be for all future migrants and not retrospective then at least people know what the situation is before they come.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Sure, but you don't need to find a job first to sponsor you.
I just read the actual Reform article. Unlike the rest of you
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
It says the party will rescind retrospectively.
So how is that "just" the Boriswave?
Will it not need to be retrospective to deal with the Boris wave if the normal electoral cycle persists?
So, if a Government got in and introduced a law making something you did illegal retroactively, and then locked you up for it, that would be fine because they had to wait for the normal electoral cycle?
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
If you have paid your way, it shouldn't be down to length of stay per se
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
Spain is very restrictive about the countries it allows dual citizenship of - mostly only Spanish speaking countries. The there would be if Spain removed ILR from British migrants there. “Renounce your U.K. citizenship and become Spanish!” That would go down well.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
You’re fighting a losing battle as the Reform fan club are desperately trying to condone a policy which is despicable. If Reform simply said it would be for all future migrants and not retrospective then at least people know what the situation is before they come.
Half of the Reform fan club here are trying to pretend Reform said something different!
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Sure, but you don't need to find a job first to sponsor you.
No - but most people hope their marriages last more than 2 years.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
If the Reform policy is as @MaxPB describes - rather than the Telegraph framing of it - then I entirely support it
The Boriswave has to go home. En masse
Oh do stop it.
Er, why? I support sending home the vast majority of the Boriswave migrants. It was an insane mistake
You can't treat 1m+ people as a lumpen mass. 'Boriswave must go' is dehumanising. Besides, who are we to be casually demanding stuff like this? The only difference between me and you and someone from Somalia is where our mothers happened to be when we said hello world. Pure dumb luck in other words. We've done nothing to 'earn' the privilege of living in the UK. Certainly none of these Reform numbskulls have. And yet they're happy to go around saying 'we' should kick millions of people out of the country because they weren't born here. It's gross. Stop the boats, yes. Control immigration, yes. Tighten the rules on asylum, yes. But all of this? No. It's truly offensive to hear.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
If the Reform policy is as @MaxPB describes - rather than the Telegraph framing of it - then I entirely support it
The Boriswave has to go home. En masse
Oh do stop it.
Er, why? I support sending home the vast majority of the Boriswave migrants. It was an insane mistake
You can't treat 1m+ people as a lumpen mass. 'Boriswave must go' is dehumanising. Besides, who are we to be casually demanding stuff like this? The only difference between me and you and someone from Somalia is where our mothers happened to be when we said hello world. Pure dumb luck in other words. We've done nothing to 'earn' the privilege of living in the UK. Certainly none of these Reform numbskulls have. And yet they're happy to go around saying 'we' should kick millions of people out of the country because they weren't born here. It's gross. Stop the boats, yes. Control immigration, yes. Tighten the rules on asylum, yes. But all of this? No. It's truly offensive to hear.
Ok boomer. Bye bye at the next election
We'll see. Don't count your racist chickens till they've hatched.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
DM me if you want to try it
Just a reminder that selling, supplying or even giving tramadol away for free is punishable by up to 14 years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And how likely do you think that could be applied in practice ?
Especially with the UK's bollox bureaucracy and multitude of human rights lawyers.
Now it may be possible to stop new ILR grants and then slowly work backwards but whatever is attempted would be almost infinitely harder than Zia Yusuf babbling about it.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
British-born people are more likely to be on benefits than immigrants.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
If you have paid your way, it shouldn't be down to length of stay per se
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
Spain is very restrictive about the countries it allows dual citizenship of - mostly only Spanish speaking countries. The there would be if Spain removed ILR from British migrants there. “Renounce your U.K. citizenship and become Spanish!” That would go down well.
I don't see a problem. If you go to live in Spain, you become Spanish.
If course a lot of Brits in Spain want to continue to get their free NHS despite no longer being resident here or paying UK taxes
Comments
The sensationalism around this is deeply stupid.
The evidence suggests that a large percentage of the British population want to expel many of if not all migrants.
The objective is to get everyone to talk about immigration for a week and for Farage to be cemented as the only person willing to be tough on it.
If the next general election becomes a quasi-referendum on immigration, with only Farage on the "be very tough" side of the argument, then doesn't he win?
It's not 2005 any more.
No “British subjects” are being sent home. Calm down
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
I actually support the Badenoch proposal to extend ILR to 10 years before citizenship. This Reform proposal is would be hugely disruptive.
This looks like a paper seeking headlines framing a policy in a way to get clicks. It’s been known
So let’s see. Take a chill pill Jill
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
This fact is one of many reasons why I love this country so much and have no plans to vote Reform.
Just that such a policy would be cruel, offensive, and very likely self-defeating.
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
I fear the Reform of whatever the new Nick Griffins are may be some way away.
The hysteria is ridiculous. They are sending home the Boriswave. As they should. That’s it
I suspect this is all whipped up by a bunch of Tory wankers who are upset their party is being devoured by reform. Tough shit. You shouldn’t have invited 1m migrants a year
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
Rather it is a necessary act for the benefit of other stakeholders.
In fact its not even anti-migrant - get rid of those current migrants who have proved unsatisfactory and replace them (if the requirement is still there) with others who would hopefully prove more satisfactory.
So how is that "just" the Boriswave?
Right now an unskilled worker who arrived in 2022 on £22k per year with 4 dependents is in line to citizenship in 3 to 4 years for all 5 of them with all of the resulting welfare claims. It's simply not sustainable and we can currently ask them to go home by revoking their visa or making it non-renewable. There are probably 2-3m in that bracket that Boris allowed into the country that should not have been invited.
I have no problem with revoking visas, maybe even ILR for people who were came from that bracket. I would have an issue with closing off citizenship from migration though, I don't think that serves the nation at all. I do think that citizenship should require a person to be self-sufficient and have a 10 year history of substantial tax contributions (£150k over a 10 year period, more with dependents?) and a spotless criminal record, not even fare evasion.
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization gives the time for different countries around the world.
On the other hand, I think we should have a concept of earning citizenship. If you have lived here for a certain length of time, have supported yourself and not claimed benefits, can speak the language, you should be granted citizenship for the payment of a small administrative fee
Can these people even hear their own words???
Spencer Hakimian
@SpencerHakimian
·
16m
RFK Jr: Social algorithms have hacked into our reptilian cores.
https://x.com/SpencerHakimian/status/1969873772837581174
I don’t support mass deportations though, which is what this policy amounts to.
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Reform have shown their true colours and are a bunch of loathsome cxnts . What started out as their combatting illegal migrants is now going after those who did the right thing . What group will be next ?
There are migrant workers who have proved satisfactory and have thus been given indefinite leave to remain. If they had proved unsatisfactory, their work visas would not have been renewed and they wouldn't have obtained ILR.
Reform UK want to go back on that and retroactively impose different rules, stripping away people's ILR. They are proposing the state re-write the terms of an agreement after the fact.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
Right wingers need to figure it out. Either I’m a lawyer good enough to be abused on Twitter/X for being involved (tangentially) in immigration law or I don’t know what I’m taking about. Pick a lane.
There does need to be something done, maybe this isn't the right policy but it will probably end up looking very much like what Kemi has talked about anyway once all of the practicalities of revoking ILR from someone who's had it for 20 years has been worked out. Though I also think ILR should have an upper limit of maybe 10 years before applying for citizenship is required. It may make for some tough decisions though for people who come from countries that don't recognise dual nationality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OmP-YyNmI8
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
The amount of times Zia Yusuf mentions ‘Boriswave’ in the article indicates there’s not going to be a way for the ex PM to do a deal with Reform
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
The Labour Party proves this week why it is not a fit party for office. A deputy leadership contest reduced to a simple question “what do you think of Starmer and his governments performance?” Union Pay Masters and Labour members installing Useless Lucy as Deputy Leader ahead of Brigitte Phillipson, proving they are clueless how PARTY SPLIT AND AT WAR WITH ITSELF plays and plays to sell out audiences for the next 4 years. Party’s split and at war with itself can never win. 😁
If Labour do borrow SIX BILLION more each year to lift the 2 child cap, they will shred their economic credibility for the next twenty years.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
That's not to say they should be got rid of but as circumstances change so do requirements.
Though, in reality, inertia affects how changes are applied.
A Reform government might say it wanted to get rid of X people, it might even try to get rid of X people but getting rid of, say, 50k non-British NHS workers would be almost impossible in practice.
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
Also Reform: we're going to send lots of people who work in the NHS 'home' because they don't earn enough.
Doesn't stack up.
Especially with the UK's bollox bureaucracy and multitude of human rights lawyers.
Now it may be possible to stop new ILR grants and then slowly work backwards but whatever is attempted would be almost infinitely harder than Zia Yusuf babbling about it.
If course a lot of Brits in Spain want to continue to get their free NHS despite no longer being resident here or paying UK taxes