Blog
Mrs May - English language by all means, but human rights as well please!
Very few people from migrant communities, or organisations working closely with them, will dispute the importance of newcomers learning English to a good conversational standard (listen to this BBC Radio 5 interview, just fastforward to 1:13:00). Those in the UK needing to learn the language to a higher standard will usually be able to find a community organisation in their neighbourhoods or towns which will signpost them to ESOL courses, if they don’t actually provide them themselves.
Our argument with Home Secretary Theresa May in the policy set out yesterday, which, from the autumn will require the spouses and civil partners of people settled in the UK to learn English before being able to come to the country, is not about the desirability of learning English, but whether it is always reasonable to suppose they will easily be able to do this in their countries of origin.
English is spoken very widely across the world, with scores of countries using it as an official language or teaching it in their schools as a basic part of their curriculum. People who use the language on a daily basis will not regard the new provision as an obstacle to gaining entry if they do find that their personal family circumstances bring them here.
But others will. This group will come from people who were brought up in rural and provincial areas and whose poor to modest family circumstances meant that they were not able pay for private course to learn the language. Is it right and proper that these people should have to learn English to a good conversational standard before they are allowed to travel to the UK to settle with partners over here?
There are human rights issues at stake here. The European Convention protects both the right to marry and found a family and also the private nature of the family life so founded. A traditional Conservative like Mrs May must be familiar with the argument that the sanctity of family life is the bulwark which protects civil society (‘Big Society’) from the Big State. We are entering dangerous terrain if we allow the State to suspend this argument when it is applied to the family life of migrants.
The Home Office has estimated that 10% of people applying to come to the UK as spouses or civil partners will be refused under the new rules. We would make a big mistake if we adopted the view that these ‘failures’ are the sort of rubbish people we don’t want in our country anyway. The vast majority will learn the language to the required standard in the months after their arrival. But all of them are members of the family of someone living, working, paying tax and making a contribution to the welfare of all of British society. Their human rights ought to be regarded, and those of their family members, ought to be regarded as a matter of some importance as well.
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Youtube
Flickr
Comments
Everyone agrees that learning English is important. But the original proposals, on which there was consultation, was that people coming to join their spouses etc should have the option of joining an accredited ESOL course after their arrival in the UK. The imposition of a pre-entry test is profoundly unfair.
I agree. Could be a potential Art. 8 challenge - Right to Respect for Private and Family Life under the European Convention on Human Rights.
It seems to me that the rules curently in place are completely sufficinet. The Life in the UK test after two years does the trick, no?
I dont see the why this is dominating the headlines. The official language of this country is English so the government should stop confusing people by publishing official documents in other languages apart from those native to the UK. It is common to see leaflets in the NHS written in chinese for God's sake this is England!
I dare the home secretary to put her money where her mouth is, ban the publication of all official bulletins and leaflets in all these foreign languages within the next 6 months or we take the entire cabinet to court for felony and treason
Expecting the spouses and partners of UK citizens to learn English in their country of origin is unrealistic. The new rules discriminate against people from third world countries who simply do not have the educational opportunities that people in the UK take for granted. For some people, learning English after arrival in the UK is the only option.
My husband is from Togo. I would very much appreciate it if Theresa May would tell me just how exactly he is supposed to learn English to the required standard there.
I thought this was a well writen article and agreed with virtually everything until I got to the last paragraph.
Firstly, I would challenge the statement 'The vast majority will learn the language to the required standard in the months after their arrival'. Many of the 10% that will not qualify won't speak a word of English- I'd be amazed if they reached the requisite standard in months rather than years. Speaking as someone from an immigrant family myself, I think 2-3 years at least would be more accurate. A toddler (who is more adept at learning a language then an adult as their brain is more of a 'dry sponge' ready to absorb words) only picks up the language after 4/5 years- think of your own child/ nephew/ niece etc
Secondly, the statement that 'all of them' are family members of people paying tax in the UK is highly dubious. A huge number of them are spouses of British citizens who rely on the welfare state. That is why the recent House of Lords decision which ruled that welfare payments can be relied upon to meet the maintenance test was such a blow for the Home Office. This applies most notably to those from certain countries- that much is supported by stats on benefit recipients by nationality/ ethnicity.
To the anonymous writer who complains that there are leaflets written in chinese.
Perhaps you would like to educate yourself before complaining about the lack of education in others who often haven't had the same opportunities as I presume you have; there is no such language as chinese- it's Mandarin.
To the anonymous clown who suggests that there is only one language spoken in China, please read the following.
Spoken Chinese is distinguished by its high level of internal diversity, although all spoken varieties of Chinese are tonal and analytic. There are between seven and thirteen main regional groups of Chinese (depending on classification scheme), of which the most spoken, by far, is Mandarin (about 850 million), followed by Wu (90 million), Cantonese (Yue) (70 million) and Min (70 million). Most of these groups are mutually unintelligible, although some, like Xiang and the Southwest Mandarin dialects, may share common terms and some degree of intelligibility. Chinese is classified as a macro-language with 13 sub-languages in ISO 639-3, though the identification of the varieties of Chinese as multiple "languages" or as "dialects" of a single language is a contentious issue.
I know that ignorance is bliss but perhaps you would like to educate yourself before complaining about the lack of education in others who often haven't had the same opportunities as I presume you have.
And before anybody jumps to the wrong conclusion; the original post was not mine, but, I do agree with the point made in the post.
The point as I see it.
By publishing leaflets in multiple foreign YES FOREIGN languages the government is doing a dis-service to immigrants to the United Kingdom that cannot communicate in English and therefore cannot integrate in the community.
In principal people are lazy, I am not categorising any individual group, I am using a very wide brush to encompass all of humankind (myself included).
"Why should I bother trying to learn a new language when everything is provided for me in my language?"
Well if someone is hit where it hurts and we all hurt n the same place (in our pocket) and we have to pay to get documents translated into a language that we do understand then we have a wonderful incentive to learn the language of the country that we have decided to immigrate to.
I am sure that nobody in their right mind will disagree that immigrants (whether temporary or permanent) should learn the language of their chosen "new" country.
I do find the new government proposal that makes the passing of a English Test prior to granting a settlement visa preposterous.
Because this ridiculous proposal does not affect me personally I will not be challenging it myself (I do not believe in tilting at windmills just for the sake of tilting) but I am looking forward to supporting the legal challenge to this idiotic proposal that I hope will soon materialise.
Has anybody ever driven to Spain? It is a requirement that your Driving Licence and insurance details are translated to Spanish.
Spain will not do this for you - if you fall foul of the law then YOU are responsible for getting an interpreter (although the British Consul are very helpful with English-speaking solicitors, etc).
So why do we provide so much information in a language (or languages) that are not ours?
Similarly, if you visit a non-European country (European countries are covered by an E111) then you MUST have Medical Insurance. Why do we not oblige people coming here to do the same?
Nick,
The point about interpreters and language leaflets is that the beneficiaries of these services are as much the service providers as the immigrants receiving them. GPs examining a non-English speaking woman in her second trimester of pregnancy usually don't want to waste time making political correct points about the necessity of learning English. A qualified interpeter helps identify the health issues with the minimum of fuss and in most cases this will avoid more expensive interventions if needs are left unmet and greater complications arise.
The example of motor insurance in Spain is not really a good one. The provision of a system of universal health care arises primarily from the public benefit of living in a healthy society, and only secondarily because of the benefit gained for the individual. Because of this it is worthwhile for society to invest in a system which includes the largest numbers of people because high participation rates = lower unit costs and greater efficiency in the way the service operates.
The provision of insurance to cover motor accidents is not so self-evidently a public good and public policy can limit itself to merely requiring that motorists make their own arrangements for obtaining cover and punisihing those who don't. Since society is not placed at risk of pandemic illness or substantial redutions in the productivity of its workforce as a result of inadequately insured drivers we can safely say that health care and car insurance are two very different things.
Those who are saying that English (and Welsh, of course) are official UK languages are missing the point. My wife is from Nicaragua, and would have found it difficult or impossible to join an English language course in her home city of a sufficently good standard to allow her to pass a test in the UK. Within two years in the UK she had a Cambridge Proficiency Certificate in English after attending ESOL classes.
Those who are making comparisons with Spain are on dodgy ground: how many British ex-pats living in Spain speak good Spanish? Perhaps the Spanish Government should ban property acquisitions by people who can't pass a Spanish language test!
John Perry,
Your point being?
As I see it you are actually proving the point that this new government proposal is ridiculous.
From your post.
Your wife is from Nicaragua, your wife immigrated to the UK, probably with very limited English comprehension skills (I am assuming that from your post).
After your wife wife arrived in the UK made an effort to learn English so that she could (among other things) integrate in the community.
As far as I am concerned, your wife is a perfect example that illustrates why the proposal that is being discussed (as far as I am aware it is not yet law) should be challenged in the courts and hopefully put where it belongs (thrown on the scrap heap).
The reason that I say that your wife is a perfect example is because (again according to your post) had this proposal been in place when your wife applied for her visa to the UK, your wife would have been denied the visa and the reason for the denial would have been on the grounds that she did not pass the English test, but the law was not in place, your wife was given a visa.
As far as Spain goes, in my opinion Spain is not really relevant to this discussion.
freddy toot,
You are missing the point about government provided foreign language leaflets and interpreters.
I agree that a GP examining a non-English speaking woman in her second trimester of pregnancy doesn't want to waste time making political correct points about the necessity of learning English,
I also agree that a qualified interpreter will help identify the health issues with the minimum of fuss and in most cases this will avoid more expensive interventions if needs are left unmet and greater complications arise.
The point (at least the point that I am making) is that providing such services for free is a disservice to that selfsame woman. If she had to pay for the services of the interpreter herself, then she would have had a powerful incentive to learn how to communicate in the language of the country that she decided to migrate to.
Like me, like all of human kind and like nature for that matter it is easier to follow the path of least resistance (water flows down hill because it is easier to flow downhill that it is to flow uphill).
Imagine someone in ........(insert country of choice)...... and imagine that they do not speak the language of that country, now imagine that they need to communicate with someone and that person only speaks their native language.
Scenario 1.
An interpreter is provided for free.
Possible reactions:
A. "OH well I will try to learn to communicate tomorrow" (In this case the definition of tomorrow means "Not today").
B. "Why should I bother trying to learn a new language when I don't have to"
Scenario 2.
The interpreter must be paid for.
Reaction (as I see it).
"Well I had better get my act together and learn how to communicate, because this is getting expensive"
Back to the main topic of this discussion.
Denying immigrants the right to migrate just because they cannot pass a language test is wrong.
It is wrong because not all immigrants have the opportunity to achieve the required standard.
I say give them the opportunity and the incentive to acquire the skills that will enable them to integrate into their chosen country.
Rasboinik
You say:
"The point (at least the point that I am making) is that providing such services for free is a disservice to that selfsame woman. If she had to pay for the services of the interpreter herself, then she would have had a powerful incentive to learn how to communicate in the language of the country that she decided to migrate to."
The problem is that a woman living on a low income might respond to this situation by postponng the visit to her GP or the ante-natal clinic because she coan't afford to pay for an interpreter. The pains troubling her might become worse so she seeks the help of older women from her own community who advise using a folk remedy. The pains then either subside and the folk remedy acquires a reputation which means pregnant women from that community become more detached from the NHS services, or they continue to the point where an ambulance is called and she is admitted to A&E.
These are not good outcomes. In public health terms they lead to an increase in premature and still birth amongst women from that community, underweight babies and all the developmental problems that arise from difficult pregnancies. The differential impact this has on women from that community increases health inequalities between them and other communities with all the dangers that this becomes an entrenched feature of population demographics in general. Once it works it way through to this level the problem becomes inter-generational, with a whole community defined by special health problems which receive poor levels of support from mainstream services.
And all because we had a squabble about whether interpreters and ehtnic language leaflets should be provided to people in need. Sorry mate, the bigger issues at stake here mean that this issue just isn't worth a candle.
Freddytoot
You say:
"And all because we had a squabble about whether interpreters and ehtnic language leaflets should be provided to people in need. Sorry mate, the bigger issues at stake here mean that this issue just isn't worth a candle."
First of all, I don't see it as a squabble about ethnic language leaflets and or interpreters.
I see it as a discussion about immigrants integrating into the country that they have chosen to migrate to.
You also say:
"Once it works it way through to this level the problem becomes inter-generational, with a whole community defined by special health problems which receive poor levels of support from mainstream services."
That is exactly the point that I am making, it becomes “inter-generational” because the migrants do not integrate.
It is my opinion that by allowing people to take the path of least resistance we are also allowing them to create ethnic enclaves (I could use a stronger word but will desist from doing so, so as not to cause offence).
Now if the government was to state that instead of printing leaflets and providing free translators they would provide compulsory (yes I did say compulsory) courses in basic English that is a move that I would whole heartedly support, I would go even further and say that in the case of a real emergency a translator could be provided but only on condition of course attendance.
The issue here is to promote integration and not the creation of ethnic enclaves.
That is the important issue.
Rasboinik
Since we seem to agree with the essential argument that the new proposal to make a pre-entry knowledge of English a condition of entry into the UK is unfair perhaps we should shake hands on that and leave the argument about leaflets and intepreting services to the appropriate blog. If we can all agree to pull together on challenging this new proposal there will be time enough for that argument in the future!
freddy toot
I agree with your comments in your last post.
With one caveat can we change the word argument to discussion ?
Rasboinik
Absolutely - long live the discussion!
There are many who do not attempt to learn the language as they do not feel the need to do so.
Many do not work (though are not necessarily on benefits as they may have spouses who do work) and are content to spend their daily lievs at home or mingling only with those that share the same language as them.
It is this significant minority that need to integrate into society.
To make the learning of English compulsory before arriving appears to be one solution to this.
I reject the argument that many don't have the opportunity to learn English in their home country. I know many people from absolutely poverty stricken backgrounds in their home country who, due to their sheer determination, picked up English prior to arriving in the UK.
If you demosntrate the same determination to learning English as you do in wanting to come to the UK you won't have a problem. Some make it sound like learning English is an impossible task abroad!
Anonymous
Okay, but what about the human right to family life? Doesn't that carry any weight with you?
Anonymous says:
June 17, 2010
"Some make it sound like learning English is an impossible task abroad!"
I have some news for you, under certain circumstances it is somewhere between virtually impossible to extremely difficult to learn English abroad, given the right (or if you wish wrong) conditions some people may have to travel a very long distance in order to attend an English course / class and not everybody can .
you also say:
"There are many who do not attempt to learn the language as they do not feel the need to do so.
Many do not work (though are not necessarily on benefits as they may have spouses who do work) and are content to spend their daily lievs at home or mingling only with those that share the same language as them.
It is this significant minority that need to integrate into society. "
Here I agree with you 100%, but, I think that your suggestion of learning English prior to arrival does not address the issue of people that are not integrating into British Society.
By making it compulsory to learn English after arrival, you are "killing three stones with one bird"
1) When attending English classes the immigrants will mingle with other migrants from different cultures (mingling leads to integration).
2) The migrants will learn basic English.
3) The basic right to family is not being denied.
Rasboinik
Some fair points you raise.
However, I disagree with your third point; the right to a family life (article 8) is a qualified right rather than an absolute right, like the right to life (article 3). We have to give priority to those who wish to come to the UK as a matter of life or death rather than those who wish to come here to enjoy a better quality of life.
It's a regretable but necessary fact that we do need to have some restrictions on the numbers we have coming in. I think it's accepted that a significant reason for the Labour party losing the elections was because of the immigration issue. Many of their core supporters left them due to their poor housing, job prospects etc which they rightly felt was attributable to the then Labour government. Indeed, Labour MPs have come out and said as much.
Of course, not all of those that cannot find a job or house or whatever else are in that situation because of mass immigration but it would be foolhardy to suggest immigration isn't at least part of the problem.
We have no choice but to limit immigration and 'raising the bar' is one such way. It's not ideal, and I say it with some reluctance but I think we need to be realistic.
Anonymous
You are right to say that Art 8 of the European Convention does envisage limitations on the exercise of the right to family life, but not on the grounds that the authorities fear a political backlash as you suggest. It would be permiitted where, for example, the authorities felt that the exclusion of a particular individual was justified because of the risk they posed to public security or public order.
In the past the Courts have also taken the view that a spouse/partner could be refused if the authorities took the view that there was no substantial impediment to the exercise of family life in another country - ie there was nothing to stop the person in the UK from giving up their home here and joining their partner in another country. However, the principle of proportionately applies here - which means that the authorities would have to demonstrate that the exclusion of the applicant has to be justified in objective terms, with a plausible argument that the public good will be advanced by this measure.
Allowing politicians to argument that the suspension of a particular human right is justified because there party needs to win the next general election would be a very dangerous direction to move in. It is true that some of the rhetoric generated around the current context for the Labour leadership is pointing in that direction, but we shouldn't so easily concede this point as you seem prepared to do. If human rights have any importance - and surely they do - then we need politicians who are prepared to fight for them on principle, and not back away just because the electorial arithmatic is looking difficult.
Don Flynn
The lead case on article 8 as far as I'm aware remains the CofA case VW & AB. That case does not set the bar particularly high but relates to article 8 and not the Immigration Rules. The government can control the Rules as opposed to article 8 which is out of its control.
However, my more pertinent point is this. If the authorities fear a backlash regarding immigration then it is because the electorate feel it has become a problem. The government is there to serve the electorate so should act accordingingly. Indeed, it would be wrong for the government not to fear a backlash- if they don't they have become complacent and are not acting on behalf of the electorate- very much like the former Labour government.
To approach it from a different direction, some of the Gurkhas were refused the right of residency for their familes (wrongly in my opinion) but it is public opinion, led by Joanna Lumley which convinced the government to change its policy ie the government reflected the public view as it should.
Similarly, the public feel immigration is not under control and so the government should act in a manner it is legally allowed to do so, ie not through the Convention but through the Immigration Rules and limiting the number of spouses settling in the UK. Therefore, not suspending human rights but at the same time addressing the concerns of the electorate and the interests of the UK more generally.
Anonymous,
You say you "reject the argument that many don't have the opportunity to learn English in their home country. " Have you any personal knowledge of what you write?
I am a UK citizen married to a Brazilian. We are both over 50 and my wife hasn't taken an exam since primary school. I am very ready to help her learn English at her own pace, but at the moment passing any sort of exam is far beyond her abilities.
It was already a monumental task to renew her settlement visa, with exhaustive paperwork and punitive charges of £644 for two years. This latest change has put it completely out of reach. I shall be forced to give up my job and move abroad.
I am surprised more people have not considered the rights of British citizens married to non-EEA nationals. I have always obeyed the law and paid my taxes. Now at a stroke the Government has taken away my right to live with my own wife in my own country - and without any debate in Parliament. I feel betrayed.
What makes it worse is that nationals of any other European country can get a five year permit for their families to live in the UK for free. That option is not open to UK citizens. In effect the Government is discriminating against its own citizens.
If the Government can get away with this, what will they do next?
Couldn't agree more.
In fact, Emily Churchill and I have launched a petition against the new English test for spouses of UK citizens.
You can find it here:
http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/no-to-pre-entry-english-tests-f...
Please sign, and encourage others to sign too. Together, we might be able to make a difference.
Rod
To answer your question directly I do have personal knowledge of what I write; I am of asian origin and have actually recently acted as a sponsor to support an application for an aunt of mine from my village. Perhaps more significantly, my home village has no school or even other basic facilities.
However, many of those from my village had an absolute determination to make a better life for themselves (often through marrying a British citizen) and now live in the UK. Many, though not all, proved that determination by going absolutely out of their way to learn English no matter what hardship it threw up. This is something I have seen with my own eyes and I have the utmost respect for these people, so yes, I do reject the assertion that it is impossible for some to learn English. Difficult, yes. Impossible? No.
Whilst I have sympathy fro your position what is often overlooked is that there needs to be some form of immigration control. Your email above refers to your rights (perhaps in a fair context) but this is the issue, not just in this field but all policy areas, where people are always at pains to point out what their rights are without fully acknowledging the repercussions of that 'right' being implemented.
There's a strong argument that we should let those of ill health come/remain in the UK, those that have any family in the UK, those that are living in poverty in a third world country- the list goes on. Where do you draw the line?
I would dearly love my grandmother to come and live in the UK if only to see my own mother stop worrying day in and day out about her ill health but I understand the reasoning behind the law that prevents her from coming over.
In a utopia world there would be no poverty or we would be in such a position where we could allow anyone and everyone into the UK but unfortunately that is not a world we live in.
I think this is a badly thought-out and profoundly unjust proposed change in the law.
My partner has recently been granted a six-month visa to come to the UK as my proposed Civil Partner and settle. We must become CPs before he can then apply for the intitial two-years leave to remain, but he will now caught by this proposed change and additional requirement for him to pass an English test in order to remain. If he fails the test, and even though we will by then have become CPs, we will be forced either to leave the UK if we wish to remain together or to separate. That is profoundly unjust and would render our havng become CPs pointless.
As others have noted, there is already the backstop which requires competence in English/Life in Britain at the two year point when applying for permanent leave to remain. Why is that not sufficient?
The reason why the test at the end of the two years is not sufficient is quite simple.
Suppose you have a foreign national come to the UK on a two year visa with a view to sitting the test at the end of that period. Many are safe in the knowledge that they will not have to pass, or even sit, the test. Why? Because they often (some would say cynically) have children knowing that this will prevent their removal under article 8.
This particularly became an issue following the promulgation of Chikwamba and Beoku- Betts and as a former Presenting Officer I and my colleagues noticed that applicants/ appellants saw this as an opportunity to circumvent the Rules.
With the birth of a child applicants know that after the two years there is no need for them to qualify under the spousal rules as they could qualify outside of the Rules and under article 8 and therefore not go to the trouble of learning English.
That's why the new criteria requires one to speak English prior to arriving in the UK.
Thanks for this clarification. So the test is necessary to impede people in the exercise of their Article 12 ECHR rights to marry and found a family. Sounds like a lousy swindle to me.
My thoughts exactly - yet further evidence that this, at best, a very badly thought out change in the law or, at worst, an indefensible attempt to limit the UK's ECHR obligations. And, how would this warped logic apply in the myriad of cases where the couple in question do not have and/or can not have children, including same sex couples?
Anonymous,
Thanks for taking the trouble to reply. Although I disagree with you I respect and value your views.
Granted that you have personal experience of one village where immigrants have gone to great lengths to learn English before coming to the UK, that does not prove it is realistically possible in every case. My wife's circumstances are quite different. It is not that she has no access to English speakers or courses - obviously I can teach her myself - but that it is much harder for people over 50 to learn a language, particularly when they have no academic background.
You seem to imply that an absolute determination to make a better life for oneself should be a precondition for getting a settlement visa. Why should that be? Not everyone marrying a British citizen does so for the same reasons as people in your village. My wife has no wish to live here permanently and did not work even when she was legally allowed to do so. But without a settlement visa she runs the risk of being refused entry any time she enters the country if she happens to meet an immigration officer in a bad mood.
You say people point out their rights without fully acknowledging the repercussions of that 'right' being implemented. Can you please explain what are the unacknowledged repercussions if British citizens are allowed to live freely with their own spouses - as they always have been since Britain became a country? Bear in mind that other things being equal, the UK partner is as likely to live in the foreign spouse's country as here, so the net impact on UK population is minimal.
You ask where I draw the line. I draw the line at the rights of British citizens. I believe British citizens should have an absolute right to live in the UK with their own spouses - subject only to demonstrating it is a bona fide marriage. Despite what you said earlier about the public feeling immigration is not under control, I am sure the vast majority of the British public would agree with me if they were asked the question - those people I have spoken to certainly do, and are shocked to discover it is no longer the case.
It seems to me there is something seriously wrong with this country when such a fundamental right can be taken away at the stroke of a pen without even a debate in Parliament.
Regards
Rod Tye.
A lot of points above, so some bullet points below dealing with some of them:
1. Don Flynn: article 12 is not a freestanding right- any breach of article 12 would have to, as a matter of law, go through article 8 so it's not a 'swindle'- it's a balancing exercise- that has been upheld by both the houses as well as the ECtHR.
2. Inevitably there has to be some sort of 'test' with regards to who can and can't come to the UK. I fail to see why an individual should be able to bring their spouse to the UK but I should not be able to bring my grandmother who I am close to. And why others should not be able to bring their aunt/uncle/brother/sister/niece/nephew etc to the UK.
3. Michael Prescott: the UK cannot limit it's obligations under the ECHR. How can it?! An appeal would simply go to the ECtHR where the UK would be overruled if a decision was unjust.
4. The point regarding same sex couples or couples that can't have children; the UK would have to apply the law in the same way to ALL couples- to do otherwise would be to penalise an average couple in favour of other minority couples.
5. Rod Tye, you say you draw the line at the rights of British citizens being able to bring their spouses. I say I would love to bring my grandmother over- why should a British citizen have the right to bring a spouse but I as a British citizen not a grandparent? If you agree that I should be able to bring my grandmother others should be able to bring other relations over from any country too. Applying this 'test' would result in tens of millions coming to the UK.
6. Rod Tye, you also say the only prerequisite should be that the marriage is bona fide. I strongly disagree with that. If that individual comes to the UK I would expect them to financially support themselves or be supported by their spouse- there (rightly) is a financial test imposed. I would much rather send my money to my family back home who are living in relative poverty.
7. Rod Tye, I'm not sure what your evidence is for a UK spouse being as likely to live in the foreign spouses country as vice versa? My experience of working for the Home Office is that at the absolute least, 95% of spouses had the intention of remainING permanently in the UK. Not surprising given the UK has a better standard of living than virtually every country in the world outside of Europe.
8. There's also the other issue of social cohesion. If you look at the current Prevent project being funded by the Government and run by charities and other organisations you'll see that a lack of English speaking is a majot problem to social cohesion.
To respond to some of Anonymous's points:
2. and 5. You may see no difference between bringing a spouse to the Uk and bringing any other family member. I think most people would say you are being disgenuous: if you are a British citizen, the right to bring your partner is surely a morally fundamental one that practically everyone would recognise as very different from bringing a grandmother or cousin or whomever? In addition, most people would probably feel that it is a right which should only be constrained by the responsibility of the British partner to ensure that the spouse is not dependent on benefits.
7. You say that your experience is that British people with foreign spouses almost invariably bring them to live in the UK, and you know this as a result of your Home Office work. But the Home Office or UKBA is only aware of what heppens to people entering the Uk and subsequently applying for ILR or citizenship. They know nothing about couples (like me and my wife) who live in the UK together for several years and then go abroad (in my case, to my wife's country). Nor do they know anything about Brits who meet someone abroad and marry them there and live there. Neither of these types of case, and there must be 1000s each year, would appear in Home Office records.
8. I agree with you that lack of English is a barrier to community cohesion - I work in this field myself. The issue isn't about the desirability of learning English, the issue is when and where. What has happened is that the government has made a change which will have make only a slight difference to numbers speaking English, by interferring in British citizens' moral rights to marry whom they choose. As others have said, it is quite obvious that it is aimed at couples with limited resources who are the ones who will have most difficulty complying, and is a deliberate further barrier added to those (like the escalating cost of visas and of ILR) created by the previous government.
Anonymous,
The right to bring in your spouse does not logically imply the right to bring in your grandmother. At least in this country, people generally live with their spouses and not with their parents or grandparents. In any case, the UKBA provides marriage visas but not grandmother visas, as you know very well.
If you refer to the latest Quarterly Statistical Summary at http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html, you will see there were 73,605 family formation and reunion settlement grants in the 12 months to 31 March, 2010.
According to the May 2010 Migration Statistics Quarterly Report at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Product.asp?vlnk=15230 the number of British citizens emigrating long term from the UK in the year to September 2009 was 134,000. It doesn't say what proportion of those were married.
I'm surprised you think we have a higher standard of living than the US or Australia. As John Perry has pointed out, in the Home Office you only see foreign spouses who choose to settle in the UK, not those who live abroad, so you're not in a position to judge their numbers. But the statistics show we're talking of fairly small numbers here. To talk of "tens of millions coming to the UK" without language tests for spouses is wild exaggeration.
Regards
Rod Tye.
John Perry
You are correct in that I was being a little disingenuous but my point remains that if one is allowed to bring a spouse why not a grandmother or other relative? It's completely arbitrary to say it's morally correct for a spouse but no-one else. i think you also misjudge the family dynamics in foreign countries like my own where individuals are often closer to their parents than their own spouses. However, it does come back to the issue of where you draw the line.
You also say the British spouse should ensure the foreign spouse doe snot rely on benefits. Firstly, sometimes, through no fault of their own (especially in the current economics climate) they may have to rely on benefits. Secondly, some will deliberately draw on benefits- who is going to police this and at what cost to the taxpayer?
I take your point about the couples living outside of the UK. However, such cases- relative to the number that opt to live in the UK- are very small. You only need to go to York House or Taylor House (where immigration appeals are heard) to see the huge numbers of couples fighting cases to be in the UK). Invariably, they are from couples where one spouse is from a third world country. For understandable reasons a British spouse is not going to want to join his foreign spouse in a war torn or poverty stricken country.
Rod Tye
You are incorrect; there is the opportunity to obtain a 'grandmother visa' as you call it through HC395 Rule 317.
Furthermore, in some cultures people do live with their grandparents so why shouldn't (I for example) be allowed to live with my grandmother if another can live with his/ her spouse- not that I want to live with my grandmother, bless her!
You are also incorrect to say that I said or suggested the UK has a higher standard of living than the US or Austrialia- I said 'virtually every country in the world'- bearing in mind there are 200 or so countries in the world. I just didn't want to type them all out. Though incidentally, I think we have a better standard of living than the US. You only need to look at crime, health, education and social justice to know that. The US and Austrailia are widely recognised as having harsher immigration policies than the UK- much harsher.
Anonymous,
You repeat your assertion that the number of couples opting to live abroad - relative to the number that opt to live in the UK- is very small. I have shown you my evidence that that is not true. Where's your evidence?
It has already been pointed out that the number of cases in York House or Taylor House tells you nothing about the relative numbers of couples living in the UK or abroad, because those living abroad don't need to apply for a visa here.
Rod Tye.
As we all know the reason for the government to attack spouses is because they are a soft target and the government are seen to be doing something.
I am married to a Ukrainian and we were married for almost four years and with two children before we decided to move back to the UK. My wife was still only given two years LLR and when I spoke to UKBA about her visa they assured me that she could still be kicked out of the country at the end of the two years if she doesn't fufill the visa regulations. Furthermore I have been told by UKBA officials both here and in Ukraine that UKBA have no concerns about splitting up a family.
Whilst I am sure that it would be in fact illegal for my wife to be removed, leaving our children here, that they have said that in the first place still leaves a dark cloud over us.
The need for another test seems to me to be pointless, there is already Life In The UK test and if they want proof of English level, why not use IELTS?
I sometimes feel that those of us who live and work with immigrants feel unable to make a real stand and be heard because of the obvious backlash from some sections of society who get all their information from certain newspapers.
The new law is unfair and a breach to our basic human rights. It will affect famillies from asia and africa...this is just discrimination and racism in diguise without a shadow of doubt. I came to this country without speaking a word in english but I learnt the language to good standards to join the university and complete my PhD in science. Now i am a well known academic research scientist..Looking back if this english test was introduced that time I would never have dreamed of i have achieved so far.
Thanks for all these comments.
Those of you opposed to the plans for a pre-entry English test might want to check you have signed the petition initated by Sophie Brown and Emily Churchill, at http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/no-to-pre-entry-english-tests-for-spouses-of-uk-citizens/200.
Do pass news of the petition on to others in you social networks - they are hoping for a lot more signatures to show the government!
[from the UKBA website]
The UK Border Agency has today published a list of approved providers of English language tests for non-European migrants applying to come to the UK to join or marry their settled partner.
(...) English language tests will be compulsory for these migrants from 29 November 2010.
Read the full article here: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2010/275292/46-english-test-partners
Could you help me with this..all the English test providers published in the article are in London, Japan and Australia.. so where nationals from other countries could take the test. My fiancee lives in Morocco what could she do about this?
@jamal
I think that some of the test providers seem to have a main office, which is listed in the sheet, but then also regional and local offices.
One of these is Test of English for international Communication (TOEIC). They have an office in Marocco. Here are the details.
http://www.ets.org/epn_directory/morocco
Please do check the websites of other approved providers, as it might be the case that some of those will have local representatives in Marocco as well.
All the best of luck.
There is nothing on the website to tell you how to take the test if you don't live in one of the countries which actually has an approved test centre. Furthermore, I just opened one of the approved centre's websites at random, only to find they can't speak good English themselves! How many mistakes are there in the paragraphs below?
TEIS is offered in two type of training: Academic and General Training.
The Academic Component judges the students' ability to study in undergraduate or postgraduate level in any educational institutions, colleges, universities of English speaking countries. It is assessed on the basis of test of three components. The General Training Component stressed on the basic essential English language skills in a wide range of framework of the social and educational environment.
Therefore, General Training Component is appropriate for the people who want to study in secondary education, immigration purposes, work experience and other training purposes.
I have been happily married to my Chinese wife for one year. of that I lived there for 9 months, always treated well be the Chinese. then one day I got a call. my Mother was very sick, also cancer. I came home and had to leave my wife in China.
now I am looking after my elderly Mum and have also just stated in a new job, my daughter helps out when I am in work.
the new A1 English law is just plain discrimination my wife is struggling to learn English in her own country, she would certainly find it much easier here.
I believe the new English law should be changed. or at least let those who have already married, the right to come here to be with loved ones and learn English where it is the common language, not break up families.
now my wife and I are not sure when we are likely to see each other again.
@G P
We have received a media enquiry from CNN, looking for someone who would be willing to talk about how the new legislation will affect their personal situation. It seems that your story is a good example of the type of hardship and predicament the languiage tests will put people into.
If you would like to share your story, please drop my a line on my email j.brulc[at]migrantsrights.org.uk or post a comment here.
It would be a pleasure for me to be involved in a such debate with the CNN about the new legislation..It is affecting me personally, my wife cannot come and settle with me in this country at the moment because of her poor English..
Could you send me an email at j.brulc@migrantsrights.org.uk and we can pick this up. Thanks!
I would also be happy to take part in any debate with the CNN regarding the new English test.
Home Secretary Theresa May said: "I believe being able to speak English should be a pre-requisite for anyone who wants to settle here.
if that's the case then it should also apply to those of EU countries who do not speak English, or this should be treated as discrimination and violation of the human rights laws.
Theresa May says.
"It is a privilege to come to the UK and that is why I am committed to raising the bar for migrants and ensuring that those who benefit from being in Britain contribute to our society.
the new English test only applies to those who are not part of the European union, yet if I am not mistaken, someone from the European union marries someone from a none European country, then it is ok for them to come here without doing the English test.
I was also told by one of my friends who happens to be married to a Chinese woman, if I was to live in Ireland for 3 months, then I could bring my wife over from China then on to the UK.
why can't the government here just let the LIFE IN THE UK test continue the way it was, then it would give people a chance to learn more easily here.
my wife is already having problems learning English. her teacher is Chinese.
I was horrified when she tried to pronounce many words that were clearly not correct., and I had to help her via web cam to pronounce the right way.
we were married on the 23 October 2009 and I lived there up until 6 July 2010.
9 very happy months. sadly we could not be together for our first anniversary.
this month I shall be 60 and it will be another special day that will shall not be together, and Christmas.
I work 5 days a weeks and my daughter helps to look after my sick mother until I get home. not much of a life. my wife would love to help to care for her but right now this looks impossible.
Jan, I would certainly be willing to talk to CNN about how the new legislation has affected my wife and me. I have emailed you with my contact details.
Thanks Rod and G P for all your help.
On a related note, Damian Green tells Newsnight that new language tests will reduce migration. Up until now the Home Office has been desperate to assure everyone that the English language requirements for spouses and partners coming into effect at the end of this month are about integration, and not immigration control. But I guess that has changed now.
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2010/11/damian-green-tells-newsnight-new-language-tests-will-reduce-migration
it is very clear that this pre-entry English test has nothing to do with integration.
more like Immigration control, but this government has chosen to pick on the none European Countries. so it's fine if you happen to come from Poland, France and other member states where there are indeed many who can't or can only speak very little English.. there are already many thousands here..
when I lived in China for nine months, I was not asked to take a Chinese test, I simply had the help of my wife and many friends. so I rightly ask that my wife is allowed to come and live here with me. on top of this, people are having to pay ever higher fees for visa's and so forth. it's all wrong and just another way of milking those of more money.
my wife and I have already been apart for 4 months and we are finding it very difficult , the pressures have clearly shown, I have had some depression and been given medication by my doctor. I come home from work and then I must cook and clean, then find the time to talk with my wife via the internet and phone.
I must agree with Sophie Brown at the start of this thread . it is unrealistic that people are expected to learn English in their Country of origin.
my wife is still trying to learn English in her Country, but it is almost impossible when you cannot find anywhere to learn good English.
Theresa May please answer me a very simple question. the Life in the UK test was introduced a few years ago. I think most if not everyone was happy with that. but why on earth have you now come up with a pre-entry test that will do very little for this government and only prolong separation and break up families, to me it feels like I and others have committed some sort of cardinal sin because we married someone who just happens to come from a none European Country. it is discrimination of our human rights.
we might as well be persecuted for marrying someone who is none European.
if everyone here could just make a little effort and email this link to as many people as possible, there are no doubt still many people out there who are not fully aware of the new pre-entry law that will come into force on 29 November.
I have already copied and pasted the link and sent to others.
Petition:
We believe that it is important for new immigrants in the UK to learn English. However, we strongly oppose the proposed pre-entry English test for non-EU nationals wishing to join their spouses in the UK, because:
1. It discriminates against those living in parts of the world where good English tuition is not available.
2. It will separate/ prolong the separation of couples while the foreign partner studies English, or if he or she fails the test. This is a violation of the human right to have your private and family life respected.
3. It discriminates against non-EU nationals, and their UK spouses, as it will not apply to spouses from inside the EU who do not speak English
4. A one-off test before spouses arrive in the UK will NOT encourage applicants to make a long-term commitment to learning English.
5. The test is NOT the best way to help people learn English - the best place to learn English is in an English-speaking country, i.e., in the UK once the spouse arrives.
6. English lessons in the UK mean interacting with the local community outside the home, and are a far better way of guaranteeing integration and combating the isolation of new immigrants than a one-off test abroad.
7. Some applicants will have to travel hundreds of miles and even leave their home country in order to access English tuition and take the test at an approved center. This is disruptive and places an unnecessary additional financial burden on individuals already paying hundreds of pounds to apply for a UK visa.
Regarding the exception of asylum seekers from this proposal:
We welcome the acknowledgement of the right of asylum seekers to bring their spouses to the UK, regardless of the spouse’s ability to speak English, and we demand that the government grant the same right to UK citizens.
We call upon the government to scrap this proposal immediately.
http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/no-to-pre-entry-english-tests-f...
UKBA has published an internal guidance on the English Language Requirement
http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/news/2010/english-language-requirement-...
Some very interesting points raised by all. Here's my two pennyworth
- Yes there is definitely a need to reduce immigration to Britain as we are a country under dire financial strain and quickly becoming over crowded. But this inst the way to achieve that goal.
- Is making immigrants to Britain to learn English a good idea to help integrate them into society a good idea, Yes of course
- Does this new rule achieve that, No definitely not
- Is there a need to close the loophole whereby people enter then have a child an no longer have to pass life in the UK test, Yes absolutely
- Has our govt. missed the point completely and come up with another stupid rule that will no doubt cost more to implement than it will save, probably yes again
Why doesn't the govt. concentrate of solving some of the real problems instead of targeting minority groups. Here are some proposed solutions to much wider problems
Illegal Immigrant entry to UK
I have no idea of the numbers as I am sure it is difficult to quantify but I wouldn't mind guessing its far higher than "educated guesses" might suggest. How about the immediate introduction of both thermal imaging camera scans on ALL lorries entering the UK as well as the use of CO2 detectors, yes you could create more jobs for the border staff but you'd probably stop many more illegals entering the country and reduce the added cost to the UK taxpayer of removing them as well as reducing immigrant crime. Crikey people, we are an island after all, protecting and policing our borders should be way easier than say in the USA where there are hundreds if not thousands of miles of unmanned border between Mexico where you can practically walk over. At least here in the UK you are limited to points of entry like ports, so much easier to police. Airports wouldn't be a problem since you cant get on a plane without a passport and visa so they wouldn't come in by air. Bottom line, if we stepped up random checks on all freight vehicles into the UK to 100% checking or even 10 times what it is now then we could practically STOP illegal immigration, well certainly dramatically reduce it.
Asylum Seekers
Lets be honest with ourselves here instead of taking the politically correct "hippy" attitude adopted by most govt officials, the bottom line is that the majority, YES the MAJORITY of so called asylum seekers are no such thing, more likely economic migrants in search of a better life or more likely still a free life. "Welcome to England, have a free house and lots of FREE money every week until we can decide if your case is genuine, oh by the way it might take us a year or ten but dont worry we'll look after you and pay all your bills and feed you and provide you with FREE health care in the mean time before possibly refusing your application at which point you'll have gone underground, sent most of those FREE handouts back home or married a British Citizen or found another loophole to allow you to stay". Now I am sorry if that sounds harsh but look at the facts if these people are genuinely persecuted in their own country then there are a whole host of countries between theirs and ours they can stop off in instead of journeying all the way to the UK. Let us not forget too the simple fact that it is INTERNATIONAL LAW they are required to seek asylum in the FIRST SAFE COUNTRY!
Solution - simple question at UK Border, "Why didn't you seek asylum in country X?" = "Sorry, you're not genuine, Bye"
Long term unemployed
You may have thought I might even be harbouring some racist tendandcies, no not at all (remember I am married to a non-EU national myself). How many lazy good for nothing layabouts have we got claiming unemployment benefits that simply have no intention of EVER getting a job? Sorry but I favour the system in place in Spain where the amount you can claim is directly proportional to how much you have previously contributed to the system and even then for a maximum of two years. Sorry but (maybe except for a very small minority) ANYONE can find a job if they really want to in that period of time, especially if there were more jobs available because there were less illegals working for peanuts, someone has got to do those jobs, if not the illegals give it to the oxygen thieves instead. How about this as a really radical idea, lets make the long term unemployed WORK for their benefits, simple menial tasks that benefit the community like street sweeping and other similar jobs which seem to have all but disappeared with govt cutbacks!, it'd teach them some values if nothing else. Maybe even motivate them to look for a "real" job. Maybe even totally restructuring the benefits system so that you can only claim child benefit and get council housing IF you have previously paid into the system for a minimum time or amount, that would discourage young pregnancies because young people want there own house / FREE money.
Crime
Lets toughen up on crime completely and stop bowing to these hippified human rights activists. serious criminals (rapists, murderers, armed robbers etc) deserve very few human rights. Lets whip all the TV's, radio's gyms and similar facilities out of these prisons and make prisons more like army barracks than 5 star resorts (there's an ironic point, eh today's prison offer more luxury and privacy than the accommodation we put our young soldiers in). Prison is supposed to be a punishment not somewhere you try to get back into because it offers you a quality of life. Lets start handing out 5 year sentences for cannabis possession, that would stop 90% of youngsters experimenting. Imagine a MINIMUM sentence of 10 years for dealing cannabis and 15yrs for dealing class A! oh whats that I hear you say, too harsh. Poppycock its called a deterrent and thats what it would be instead of the slap on the wrist most people get for it under current rules. Imagine a minimum of 5 years for assault, 20yrs for rape, 25 yrs for murder with NO PAROLE!! Bottom line make it a real deterrent and people will stop and think twice before they offend. result less people in prison, yes maybe for longer but sooner or later society will change and crime will be dramatically reduced.
OK, I think I have gone on enough, you get my point. There are far more serious issues damaging our country right now than a few thousands couples in love coming to settle in the UK. Perhaps if the govt. focussed on thise and left the innocent minority alone they might actually make some progress.
I doubt it, comments please
This legislation is barbaric. I am a UK citizen who has paid taxes in the UK for 25 years. My wife is Ukrainian and we have a lovely daughter who is now 4 months old. We were about to submit her spouse visa application when this legislation was suddenly brought forward and implemented. The system is chaotic and the infrastructure is not in place. The only testing centres are in Kiev. There is no specific test in place to obtain the required CEFR A1 level so the only tests available are complex, business-orientated, taken in 2 parts and need to have the respective pass mark 'mapped' from their making structure to the CEFR one. There are disputes about the mapping level so in some cases CEFR have just upped the pass mark required so that it is not longer a basic level that is required to pass. Also there is not enough capacity, forcing us to be apart for months longer than we have already while waiting for the test. My wifes' English is good enough for us to communicate and she is learning more all the time and I am also learning Russian, but I fear that she may fail the test, as she said that the first part was very difficult and nothing like a 'basic test of English'.
Besides all of this chaos, this legislation has NOTHING to do with integration,etc. It is pure discrimination against UK citizens and citizens of non-EU countries.
Firstly, citizens of EU countries are exempt! So it would be OK for me to marry a Polish woman who speaks not one word of English and she would be welcome, but because she is Ukrainian she is not.
Secondly, spouses of asylum seekers are also exempt. So now the rights of a British citizen are secondary to the rights of asylum seekers! I wish to point out that I fully support our role in providing asylum but would expect to be afforded the same rights as a British citizen.
Aside from all of this argument, immigration as a result of a British citizen falling in love and marrying somebody from overseas represents a tiny proportion of total immigration so I fail to understand why it is being targeted in this way. Surely this is the most natural and organic form of immigration and should be protected. If the situation is deemed to be so urgent that married couples are being targetted then perhaps the government should instead be looking at stopping all immigration from ALL countries for people with no existing family connection in the UK first and maybe actually get round to tracing and expelling the hundreds of thousands of missing failed asylum seekers who are in the UK illegally.
Once my wife and I were married and had a child together, the visa application should have consisted of a simple visit to the British Embassy in Kiev, maybe an interview and the presentation of our documents and the granting of the visa in the same day, especially since it costs £600!!!??. The UK Border Agency is paid for out of our taxes. They should exist to provide a service and to give us the visa to which we should be entitled. Unfortunately, it seems to exist purely to reject as many applications as possible on technicalities. The attitude of the staff is pompous and self-important and their warped logic when refusing visas is quite obviously the result of a 'results orientated' system instead of a humane and common sense one. My wife was not allowed a simple visitors visa in December 2009. Whatever evidence and documentation you produce they will inevitably just say that there is not sufficient reason to believe that she will return home. When my wife took her language test she spoke to another lady who is married to a UK citizen and was rejected a 2 week visitor visa for this reason even though she has a 5 year old child in Ukraine!!!! I have also spoken to people who have visited before but are now being rejected from further visits even when presenting exactly the same documentation and evidence as before.
I find it hugely depressing that I am just trying to get on with my family life and am being obstructed in this way. I never voted for a government to do this to me. I never voted for the EU and dont see why EU countries should be treated any differently from others such as Ukraine. My taxes go towards unemployment benefits for others and presumably for asylum seekers. I accept this as my social responsibility but not when I am not permitted to live with my wife in the UK. We want no public funds or help from anybody.
This is causing distress to myself, my 14 year old son and elderly parents in the UK and to Tanya and our new baby. It is nothing short of a scandal and a disgrace!
It's even worse than you suggest. If YOU were a Polish citizen working here, rather than a UK one, you would have the right to bring your wife to the UK for 5 years (renewable) with no language test and no fee. British citizens are the only European citizens who do not enjoy this right in the UK. The Government is discriminating against its own citizens.
The problem is that the interests of UK citizens married to non-EEA nationals have been completely ignored by this Government and the last. And the reason for that is that, so far as I am aware, there is no organisation which represents our interests. For all the fine work done by MRN and similar organisations, which I strongly support, our case is a separate one and we need our own representation.
The people I've spoken to in the UK have been completely unaware that British citizens no longer have the right to live in their own country with their own husband or wife, and are shocked when I tell them. I believe that a co-ordinated campaign of writing letters to MPs and the press might be very effective at raising awareness that an injustice has been done. At least it would provide a balance to the spurious arguments on language tests which currently go unchallenged.
I'm currently in the process of moving to Brazil, since I can no longer get a visa for my wife to come here. Once I'm settled - I hope in a couple of months - I would like to set up such an organisation. I invite anyone who is qualified and interested in joining to write to me at "citizens@rodtye.com".
I agree with Jon Allen - it is obviously right and sensible to encourage/require immigrants to learn English asap as a way of fostering integration, but the effect of the particular method this Government chose to adopt to achieve that objective can in practice be barbaric and profoundly unfair. There were alternative approaches, less harsh in their impact, but the Government chose not to adopt them.
yesterday i went along with my partner for him to take the listening and speaking test.
The UKBA say that the minimum standard that applicants will need to meet is in speaking and listening at level A1 of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR).
CEFR define this Level A1 as: the level of a basic speaker, who can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases. They can introduce themselves and others, and can ask and answer questions e.g. where they live, people they know, and things they have. They can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly, and is prepared to help. no problem i though!! my partner has been studying english as a foreign language for one year here in england, therefore this should be an easy assessment for him to pass.
However, it soon became apparent on arriving at the test center that if i was not there to assist him he wouldnt have understood a thing as the test organisers were not helpfull by speaking clearly and slowly and taking the time to make sure the candidates understood the format of what was expected of them. i thought the test was going to be that someone would assess his ability to interact with basic comands and assess his ability to speak basic english.
the test was is two parts. first part in three sections listening to three recordings, after each recording then try to understand what they were talking about then answer 7 questions in each section, choosing from multiple choice answers. the time allowed was15 minutes. my partner found this very difficult as he said the recording was someone speaking quite fast and he did not understand what they were talking about.
the second part of the test came three hours later (after sitting waiting in a freezing cold room). this part of the test my partner found a lot easier. the examiner asked him a number of very basic english questions and asked him to describe things he saw in a photograph, my partner felt this part of the test went well. however my problem is that all the 15 candidates that sat this test all came out of the first part of the test saying they did not find it easy as the recordings were very qick and not enough time to think about the question.
to pass the test candidates need to score 50% in both sections!! i myself think that this would have been very difficult for anyone with a good level of english to achieve never mind someone with a basic level. the whole thing is a shambles and a mockery and the government should have waited untill they had devised a test that met the standard of the CEFR AI level before introducing the ruling.
having read some of the interesting letters above, it is pretty obvious that there are very serious problems with this Governments recent introduction of the new English A1 test, SO WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THE PRESENT
LIFE IN THE UK TEST ????
why on earth can't they just leave it as it was. people could come and learn English here in the UK. but what about those who cannot learn English in their own country for one reason or another.
.......................................................................................................................................
today my Chinese wife applied for her VISITOR visa at a cost of 280 UK pounds.
the reason she has applied is because there is no way she is able to learn English at the level stipulated by UKBA, and the letter above by KB shows why.
now my wife and I have decided that it would be much better if she is ALLOWED a visitor visa then she would have a much better chance to learn English here in the UK, then on her return to China, she would have much more confidence to sit the test. also it would allow us to enjoy a little time of our married life together, having been married fifteen months, lived 9 months together in her country and the rest of the time have been separated because of yet another change to the Immigration laws. maybe I am asking too much. we shall wait to see what the residing visa officer says.
I find it deplorable that being a British national, my wife and I are are one of many happy couples who being kept apart by a silly law that should never have been implemented the way it was.
it's hard to believe that many people like us are having to live apart because we happened to fall in love and marry someone who comes from a none European country. this new English law should never have been rushed through, and it was done to deter British people from marrying those from none European countries. Immigration control, not INTEGRATION as Theresa May says.
if people unite and complain to their MP's and also the news papers.
people should be made aware of what is happening. British people are being Discriminated because we choose to marry someone outside the EU.
Some latest development on the spousal visa and language requirements.... Migrants Rights Network will blog about this soon with our views on the issue, but in the mean time here is the latest news for your information
---------------------------
The Government's new policy of insisting that spouses and civil partners of foreign nationals must be able to speak English suffered a major setback after a ruling by the High Court on 1st March 2011.
Mr Justice Beatson sitting at the Birmingham Administrative Court on 1st March 2011 granted permission to apply for Judicial Review to three Claimants. They had each sought to have their spouses join them in this country. They are nationals of Pakistan, Yemen and India. They do not speak, read or write English. They had contended that a new amendment to the Immigration Rules which was brought in very recently was discriminatory as the change of rules applied only to certain countries and not for example to Canada or Australia or the European Union. The Claimants had also asserted that the Government's Rule meant that their Article 8 family life and other human rights were breached contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights.
In a landmark judgement, Mr Justice Beatson has granted permission to apply for Judicial Review to each of the Claimants after a contested hearing today. The case if some significance. The Government had contended that the English language requirement was for good reasons stating that, "The new rules will help promote the economic well-being of the UK, for example by encouraging integration and protecting public services. It will also assist in removing cultural barriers, broaden opportunities for migrants and help to ensure that they are equipped to play a full part in British life" The statistics presented to the Court showed that this would affect many thousands of potential immigrants to the United Kingdom. Many believe that this was an attempt to reduce the numbers seeking entry from outside the EU and from outside of the USA, Canada and Australia. If that was the Government's attempts then it leaves its policy in disarray and will mean yet another question mark over the Government's commitment to seeing a reduction in the numbers of immigrants that will be granted entry to the United Kingdom.
The Court has listed the cases for a substantive Judicial Review hearing over two days on 18th and 19th July 2011.
The Claimants are represented by Mr Ramby De Mello and Mr Abid Mahmood of No5 Chambers and Mr Tony Muman of 43 Temple Row Chambers, Birmingham. The instructing solicitors are Mr Sanjeev Sharma of JM Wilson & Co LLP Solicitors and Ms Robina Shah of The Immigration Advisory Service, Birmingham Office.
On Wednesday the UKBA published a new list of approved English language test providers in the UK and other countries across the globe, to be phased in for use by Tier 1 and Tier 2 PBS applicants, and spouses and partners. The whereabouts of English language test providers has been a particularly charged issue since the rules changed in relation to those people applying to come to the UK as spouses or partners last year.
From 29th November 2010, those applying as a spouse or partner have been required to take an English language test as part of their application. This was a controversial rule change at the time, as reported on the MRN website. A particular issue is that this requirement could negatively impact on people applying to come to the UK who do not have access to an approved test provider within their country of residence - potentially creating unfair obstacles to their joining family members in the UK. It is also now the subject of a Judicial Review brought by three claimants in the West Midlands, listed for 18th and 19th July 2011.
MRN will be reviewing the list of approved English language test providers over the coming weeks - and gathering views and perspectives from people who have been affected by the English language test requirement for people applying to come to the UK as spouses and partners. If you have been affected by this rule change since November 29th, please get in touch with us at info@migrantsrights.org.uk.
Me and my wife are deeply affected by this rule which left us apart since we got married last november.I am a British citizen and my wife is a moroccan national (she can speak French and Arabic, but unfortunatly only little English), I paid hundreds of pounds for her English tuition fees so far in Morocco, but English lanquage provision in the town where she lives is very poor and what she has learnt is not be enough for her to be able to pass the test. I feel that my human rights as a British citizen are denied, and that I am kept apart from my wife by a racist rule which started as an electoral bribery. I am sure that David Cameron will change his mind if he steps in my shoes, and see what is like to be kept from the family and loved ones.
Hi Jamal
we are just two of many who have been affected by this cruel new English test law.
I believe that the day will come soon enough when this law that discriminates and violates peoples rights to be together will scrapped.
I am also a British citizen and got married in 2009,lived with my wife in her country for nine months, unaware of the new ruling until I had to come back to the UK.
we have not seen each other for over eight months. but our suffering and those of many others appears to be ignored by this government.
the UK is part of the European union. but British nationals are being discriminated by our own government. and our human rights don't seem to matter to this government
please take a look at this web page.
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/eucitizens/rightsandresponsibilites/
This page explains the rights that nationals of the European Economic Area (EEA), Swiss nationals and their families have to come to the UK to visit, live or work.
As an EEA or Swiss national, you have the right to live and work in the UK (known as the 'right of residence') if:
* you are working here (and have registered or obtained permission from us if this is required - see Employment below); or
* you can support yourself and your family in the UK without becoming an unreasonable burden on public funds
You will not need to apply for a work permit. Your employer should not discriminate against you because of your nationality in terms of conditions of employment, pay or working conditions.
seems your treated differently if you belong to one of the other EU states.
I also like the bit. without becoming an UNREASONABLE BURDEN on public funds.
yet again, one law for European states and another for none European states.
most people with any sense would clearly agree, this is discrimination and violation of our human rights for those of us who's only crime was to fall in love with someone who happened to come from a none European country.
I have lived in UK for three years regarding my job, and about 2-years with my wife. We did made an application for me to switch to spouse visa, we were not aware of the fact that I can't switch to spouse while in exempt status, so all the money we spent was wasted. When my job finished in consultation with a solicitor I came back to my country, but before coming back I took two tests, one English Language test to prove that I can speak and understand the Language; second Life in UK test, which someone suggested to do, I passed both test in one attempt.
Then as suggested by the solicitor I came back, after a month or so I received the certificate, which I promptly sent to my solicitor for his record. Later that day he ranged my wife and told that this certificate is no longer valid and therefore not acceptable to UKBA as evidence of my proof of knowledge of English Language. So another 200 pounds wasted and stress strain is added to already stressful life, being parted with each other.
Afterwards I registered with a local Cambridge ESOL test provider, with the confirmations that the test result will be available in 2 weeks time. We contended with it, now I have received another letter from Cambridge University confirming my registration, and at the bottom of that letter informing that test result will be available on internet no before a month; an for the Certificate I have to wait for another three months.
We are really in situation where we are willing to do everything legally but everything or all odds are against us living together for indefinite time period. My time spent with my wife who only knows English doesn't count at all to prove that I am well conversant with the language. My Life in UK test certificate does not count as well.
While I am agreeing with all posts above, that this is a discrimination; but keeping in view the insistence of UKBA that this pre-arrival requisite language proficiency is for helping the immigrant to integrate with the community, I can only request the UKBA, please, if somebody has proved or in process of proving or accomplishing or abiding your rules give them a chance to do so, before you change whole thing.
I do agree that this is splitting families and a discrimination against law abiding British Citizens, and everybody else who is UK (other EU nationals) have all the human right and privileges. Only British people are not allowed to exercise their basic HRs, that is by their own indigenous government.
Thanks all.
Hey guys, this is for everyone who has reported their difficulties with this language test issues on this thread... I'm Don Flynn, director of MRN
You probably know the human rights challenge has now been argued in court and we are expecting a ruling sometime next week. Tis has generated a bit f excitement in the media, who are covering this from a 'should immigrants be made to speak English?' angle.
We've been contacted by the producer of the BBC1 programme 'Sunday Morning Live'. It goes out on a Sunday Morning at ten. It usually get over a million viewers..
It's a studio debate show, presented by newsreader Susanna Reid, with three guests in the studio. There is no studio audience - instead they have a variety of experts and commentators lined up to call into the programme via Skype, and contribute to the discussions.
This week the lead debate will ask whether immigrants to Britain should have to be able to speak English before they arrive. I amone of the 'experts' they will be using, and I will obviously be arguing in favour of migrants being allowed to come in without an English test. But they want to speak to someone who's had direct personal experience of the hardships this test calls, and maybe one of you will be interested in doing tis.
If you are, can you email me at info@migrantsrights.org.uk.
Thanks,
don
Partners test for UK, Spouse test, Marriage visa test introduced by UKBA since 29th November 2010. Every spouse/ partner has to clear English basic Level A1 test as per regulation by UK Border Agency, in Punjab India, Jalandhar amritsar, Ludhiana Hoshiarpur Barnala Moga, Chandigarh, Gurgaon, Delhi, Mumbai.
Please visit our office for more information.
We will provide the certificate within some days and will be giving you coaching to appear for this test.
Call NORTHWEST IMMIGRATIONS on 0181-4627907 , 8427233007
We have 100% success rate so far. It is a fairly easy test made easier by world class coaching and qualified teachers.
please do not fall into trap of other unsolicited agents who would ask you to get a fake certificate as this is issued from London, USA, Malaysia as per the tests.
We can get you file your case in 1 weeks time. please visit or call for more information.
I don't know if there is any moderator who looks into the posts before publishing them, I am really very cross to see an add appearing in this blog, this rdiculos, we are in a situation where we are stuck in hardship and upper poster has posted an advert to encourage to take the test for the sake of their business opportunity. Can anyone look into this.
I agree wholeheartedly with anonymous, moderator please remove the ad from northwest immigration etc etc touting for business.
I am in a similar position to some of the other posters here.
My wife is Russian and has made a considerable effort to learn English, achieving an overall band score of 4 in IELTS. Her original B1 certificate was not taken at an approved centre resulting in refusal of her visa in December 2010.
My wife received her results in April and as I was in the process of moving jobs we held off the 2nd application. Forward now to July when we looked at makong a 2nd application only to find the UKBA have raised the bar for takers of IELTS. Now it seems my wife must achieve grade 4 in all disciplines, basically level B1, whereas the rules clearly state level A1 in speaking and listening only.
The UKBA have now not only introduced unlawful pre-entry tests but also set differing standards between test providers.
My wife achieved grade 3.0 in speaking, 4.5 in listening, reading 3.5 and writing 4.5. This equates to level B1 when compared to CEFR but UKBA specify a minimum of grade 4 in all 4 disciplines. My wife's level of English is at the very least level A2 well above the minimum required but apparently not acceptable even though the rules state a minimum of level A1 in speaking and listening only.
Letters to UKBA are not responded to, obviously to give them time to raise the bar again. A letter to David Cameron illicited a response stating that UKBA was best placed to answer my query and as such my letter has been forwarded to them. UKBA failed to respond to the letter I sent direct to them so I do not expect any response from them again.
Since then I have written to Nick Clegg, Theresa May, Ed Milliband, all have failed to respond. My MP responded with a sorry but I can't help, obviiously not politically beneficial to challenge his own party. Other people I have spoken to have received responses from their own MP's suggesting they should go and live in their spouses home country. This is a disgraceful attitude from government members.
They should consider the numbers, if 10% of applicants are likely to be affected just how many voters are likely to switch allegiance. I think it could be alot more than 10% and I for one will be switching my allegiance.
My wife is no longer able to take further English lessons, she works 10 hour days, 6 days a week, which may be frowned upon in the UK but is a situation she must accept in Russia.
In every piece of correspondence I have written I have clearly stated my wife has every intention of learning English and the best place to learn it is where she will hear it spoken everyday. We are more than happy to accept a condition being placed on her visa, we are willing to pay for any translators needed and to arrange medical insurance. We only want to be permitted to live our lives together.
Everyone quotes ECHR articles about a right to family life and I agree anyone in this position is having their rights breached but few mention that this rule is blatantly discriminatory on the grounds of Language as per Article 14.
I quote:-
ARTICLE 14
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour,LANGUAGE, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.
Since our marriage I have supported two homes, my own here in UK and helped my wife with her flat in Russia. This creates a serious drain on savings and I am sure the UKBA will not take that into account before questioning our ability to support ourselves when we make a 2nd application.
This ruling is forcing British citizens to leave their home country, maybe this is the Governments overall plan to reduce net immigration/migration figures.
From everything I read no other European country imposes a PRE-ENTRY language requirement. They may impose a visa condition regarding learning the language and when all is said and done the majority of us affected by this rule would be happy to accept that.
Theresa May, David Cameron, Damien Green, Nick Clegg WAKE UP AND SMELL THE ROSES we as members of the public pay your salaries at least have the courtesy of hearing us out, applying some common sense and compassion to the rules and responding to us.
The idea of bringing a spouse over to the UK to study English is also blocked by immigration rules if people read them correctly unless the visa applied for is a student visa. However the rules for a student visa do not take into account a student being supported by their UK spouse.
@anonymous and @Lionel Barnes
thanks for flagging this up. The comment has now been removed. We do keep an eye on the majority of comments posted here, but due to the volume of the conversations aren't always able to remove them straight away. So flagging them up is always appreciated.
Kind regards,
MRN Communications Team
Greetings from NORTHWEST IMMIGRATIONS AND EDUCATION CONSULTANCY!
I am sorry to hear about your case Lionel Barnes . I would do the same and will be disappointed if I was in your situation. I understand your concerns. I have heard there are so many cases from around the world regarding this language requirement as there are many people around the world who are not able to communicate freely in English. But this is the fact as well as Our Esol students tell us that they are able to maintain their daily lifes better after learning basic English. although everyone used to learn English before as well. but now it s a basic requirement.
and Lionel please take my expertise and ask your wife to go for Esol test which is carried out by University of Cambridge esol examinations. KET which is KEY english test. you should never go for IELTS . as this is very tougher test and ESOL is a i would say 10 times easier than IELTS.
Even people with basic qualification less than high school in India have cleared it. listening and speaking skills are accessed only.
test fee is only around £30 .
I wish you best of luck and hope you will have your spouse in UK this Christmas.
I think you commented on the link and I thought you might get some help with this.
Please go for it and you will have a smiley face. I really get satisfaction when I make myself a medium of metting 2 loved ones.
Thanks and good luck
Northwest Immigrations and Education consultancy
Right lemme introduce myself, I am Teacher at North west Immigrations giving coaching for ESOL.
I can understand the disappointment, but there is no control over the rules of any nation in anyone's hands.
I would recommend everyone to ask their husband/wifes to go for the KET test. get the practice test and with a very very little guidance or coaching anyone can pass this test within days.
We have helped alot of people in India to get that test passed and join their spouse.
donot opt for any other test, although there are options of PEARSON test Academic only. where candidate gives Computer based exam and get results in mere days. but its costly. only go for KET or any other Esol test.
Believe me everyone who gets my free advice in any part of world, will thank me for that. trust me.
I wont get any benefit but will get blessings from people. thats enough for me.
Best of luck and have a good life..
and yes because we need to earn a living, we train in India Punjab. people who dont have basic level of English to get to a basic level and tell about culture of UK. and this is how we get paid from our employers. but it is only local people who come to us.
thanks
@moderator @lionel Barnes and @ anonymous . Please accept my applogies but if you think of my point of view and review my comments posted now. and go for the test without paying anything to me . your spouse will get a Valid for life English certificate which will be helpful for her .
Till this test requirement is in place which i guess is not in our hands except to go to court and see if it can be turned down or anything easiest things can be done.
might be people go to UK and pass the test there only. this will at least keep families together. and please understand, I am a human being as well and I listen to the same problems everyday and I feel bad. so I help people to get to their spouse asap. and As far as my thinking goes, i think a basic understanding can be delivered quite easily but there are some people who are old but below 65 yrs of age, like there were a wife of 2 kids who was 50 yrs old and she had to pass the test. it was not easy for her but since she passed, she is very confident of doing many tasks in English but yes she struggled bit due to big gap in studies, but we have seen a different person who can communicate better since she will land in UK. and same comments from many spouses who are older.. and its a very easy task for some who are graduates in different language..
So yes I am associated with this business but my aim is not to hurt anyone intentionally and please the comments I have posted is something which will help to reunite families rather than waiting for the rules to get changed....
This is the best place i found to discuss these matter. thanks to moderators.
Best of luck ALL .
Ket is the Key English test by university of Cambridge Esol Examinations.
thats the Key to get to meet your spouse. least fee exam as well
i wonder how this Big university is providing this test and provides a certificate issued from London as well.
please note that it is upto you to believe me as I or NORTHWEST IMMIGRATIONS , INDIA dont get anything if you go for any exam or not. these are big world renowned bodies.
thanks
I still have reservations against this advertiser, he is still advertising his institute and while doing this he is giving false information, as the KET i.e Key English Test you have to pass all four parts Readin, Writing, speaking and listening, there's no speaking and listening test available outside UK as far as I know. And it can be confirmed from Cambridge University. Moreover there's is no test available at level A1, the KET is available at level A2 outside the UK. I know it well because I have gone through it.
He is also lying about the time period required to get the certificate. It took me three months to get certificate,see following details to have an idea about how it works:
Test booked: 13th April
Test date: 23rd may
Online result: 30th June
Certificate received: 16th august
Altogether about four months to get the certificate. If somebody has any doubt please see the Cambridge university website. Please don't be trapped by these advertisers, because I have been ripped by one of them I have lost about two hundred pounds. Just do every thing through the Cambridge university, this the best recourse for anybody who is in this situation and want to go through this inhuman language requirement.
Sorry to say this Jan but the man is still posting and you can't do anything about it.
I really doubt the credibility of this man who is claiming that he is a teacher, just read what he is saying and you will see the flaws in his own English.................
Please be aware....
hello
i think that this language test condition might be withdrawn as many people are appealin against it.
well. i think it is making english schools popular and every person has to learn basic english.
but exceptions are there if any person has done graduation in english medium he wil not have to go for the test. over 65 yrs of age or if the person is marrying a person from european union.
my friend didnot have any problem as he married a european citizen.
and i donot doubt the credibility of this northwest immigrations or the person advertising. becoz my hubby had to go for the same test. and he got certificate in september and test was given on 28th july. so i had to wait for 2 months. it depend on the date you give the exam and it was very easy as he described.
if you see the language page on ukba website then you find there are actually many tests you can do. it around 15-20 different tests. whichever suit you.
actually i found the fee when you apply is alot because it is around 1200 pounds for settlement which is very costly. i dont know why the fee is so high??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11700950
Post new comment