Tag Archives: david cameron

The conservatives break up another British family


This is the story of Andy, a man who has had his family torn apart by the government. Despite being a British citizen, Andy didn’t make enough money to be able to live with his wife, so his children had to be separated from their parents. It’s not really a story about Andy – it’s about us and the kind of country we want to live in, but Andy’s story typifies it pretty well.

You will have heard of the Conservative aspiration for tax breaks for married couples. It’s in the coalition agreement and the midterm review. The government is very keen to show how pro-family it is. You will probably not have heard of the policies they impose on low-earners who happen to fall in love with someone from outside the EU. They’re a little quieter about those.

Last year, Theresa May did something fundamentally different with the immigration system. Instead of restricting the freedom of migrants coming to Britain, she restricted the rights of Brits who want to marry people from outside the EU. There was a dribble of coverage in the press, but most still don’t know that if they want to bring a foreign spouse to live with them they need to be earning £18,600. If you’ve got a kid it’s £22,400 and an additional £2,400 for each further child. Under the new system, 40% of the British working population are prevented from bringing a foreign spouse to live with them here in Britain. This, by the way, was the compromise. May wanted the income benchmark higher.

Andy fell into that category. He came back to the UK last March after a long stint in China, bringing with him his wife of six years and their two children. They had just intended to stop by for a holiday with his brother but once he got back Andy enjoyed being home. “The kids liked it,” he says. “It’s nice for the boys to be around their grandparents, to be able to eat sausage rolls and cheese and all that. I wanted to come home. The Chinese schools are pretty scary – I would have had to put them in international schools.”

Andy had also been diagnosed with deep-veined thrombosis the year before and felt more confident with British healthcare if there was another occurrence. “I’d been away from England for ten years,” he says. “I missed it terribly over the years. I’ve been to lots of countries but there comes a time in everyone’s life when you want to go home.”

This entirely natural approach to life was clear evidence of suspicious activity in the broken mindset of the UK Border Agency (UKBA). Immigration minister Mark Harper decided the family had been wrong to enter on a visitor’s visa and that they had always intended to settle here. By this point Molly was already back in China. That hadn’t been an easy choice for the family but she didn’t want to overstay her visa. They played by the rules. She had no idea that before she could return an overzealous immigration system would put a black mark next to her name, even though she’d broken no rules at all. Andy’s MP, David Laws, wrote to Harper urging a change of mind, but to no avail.

With his wife overseas, Andy now has to go through the entire spousal visa application process without her. It could rob his children of their mother for up to a year. First he needs to show UKBA six month’s worth of payslips proving his salary is above £18,500.  Then he needs to twiddle his thumbs during the processing period, which can take up to four months, and hope the authorities do not complain about something irrelevant and unforeseeable, as they frequently do.

He eventually found a job paying over the requisite amount as an academic manager for a chain of language schools. Unfortunately, the job was in Cornwall, so he had to leave his three- and five-year-old children with his parents in Somerset during the working week and only visit them on weekends. This is a situation the British government has inflicted on a British family: the father in Cornwall, the mother in China, their children in Somerset. Their only contact with their mother is on Skype. Recently one of the children started calling her ‘computer mummy’.

“She’s in limbo, my kids are in limbo, I’m in limbo,” Andy says.

“My kids have lost their dad. I drive home two-and-a-half hours every Friday and then again Sunday night. I’ve bags under my eyes. No-one can believe my wife is being prevented from being with her baby boys. China has got its faults, but in terms of family they would never come between a parent and her child.”

Few Brits would have predicted that immigration laws would prevent them marrying whoever they chose, regardless of their income. “It took me by surprise,” Andy says. “When we first started thinking about staying for longer I made some inquiries about changing to a spouse visa and I was shocked. I didn’t think these rules applied to me. Other people do that, I thought.”

Then, quite suddenly, Andy breaks down in tears. “What sort of a man am I, that I can’t keep my family together?” he asks, after a long silence. “I walk around Cornwall. People are chatty here. You tell the story again and again. You feel uncomfortable. It’s weird, a man of my age being completely alone. I’m a family man, I always have been and now I’m not.”

Of course, the question isn’t what sort of a man Andy is. It’s what sort of a country we are. Our constant obsession with immigration is making this a hard, mean place; a place that splits up families so it can satisfy David Cameron’s absent-minded promise of ‘tens-of-thousands’ coming in a year.

As ever, none of this applies to the rich. Non-British millionaires can come and stay as long as they like, no questions asked except for the parameters of their wallet. Hard-working Brits earning under the average wage – the kind of ‘strivers’ George Osborne apparently has such sympathy for – aren’t even allowed to bring in the person they fall in love with.

The problem isn’t with Andy, it’s with us.


The opinions in politics.co.uk’s Comment and Analysis section are those of the author and are no reflection of the views of the website or its owners.

Stop David Cameron and Teresa May destroying UK families

This page is to make people aware that while the government are spouting the importance of family life they are destroying thousands of families throughout the UK.

In July 2012 Teresa May and David Cameron made it near impossible for the working class people of the UK to have the right to have their non EU wife or child live with them in the UK by bringing in a minimum wage threshold of £18,600.

Family migration in the UK covers 3% of immigration,for the sake of 3% Teresa May and David Cameron are willing to keep husbands and wives,parents and children apart,they face living apart for years under the new rules, meaning the likelihood is the family will break up and this government will be responsible for a lot of one parent families.

When people think about immigration to the UK they think of people coming here to claim benefits and add nothing to the system,with regards to family migration the partner is not allowed to claim any benefits for the first five years,in that time if the relationship turns out to be bogus they are sent back to their country,Teresa May fails to mention this,and fails to mention the fact that EU citizens can at a drop of hat turn up tomorrow in the UK without any connection to the UK or without any intention of adding anything to UK.

Family visa’s are being rejected by the home office for minor reasons,once the spouse has paid the best part of £1000 for the visa which is non refundable he then gets told that an appeal can take up to a year,and he will have to pay for this to,the government are putting up obstacles and changing the rules almost daily so they can keep their net migration figure down to create political credit,in the mean time thousands of UK citizens who have lived here their whole life,who may have met their spouse while working or travelling abroad are forced apart so David Cameron and Teresa May can say their figure for immigration is 3% lower.
Please add any news and stories about family migration to the UK .


Mum takes UK visa battle to Westminster – David Cameron & Teresa May attempt to break up family

A MUM who has seen her son’s family ripped apart by tough new immigration laws has been invited to speak at a key Parliamentary debate about the controversial legislation.

Gillian Davies-Nippel has seen at close quarters just how devastating fresh guidelines, put in place last summer, can be.

Her heartbroken son Kevin Allen, from Catrine, appeared in the Chronicle on December 26 as he faced up to Christmas without wife Jamie and children Tristan and Eowyn.

His fight to obtain a visa for the trio to fly them in from the USA has been a frustrating and ultimately forlorn one.

All because he wasn’t able to prove he earned £18,600 in his native Scotland.

Gillian has campaigned on his behalf and her efforts have been rewarded when she visits Westminster on January 23.


Uncertain future for family – Actions by Teresa May and David Cameron of the Conservative party UK

Tim Cox and Sarah Cox. Sarah is Filipino and has been denied a visa. She will have to leave the country and their two children in June Kimberly Cox and James Cox


Published on Wednesday 2 January 2013 06:30


New Year is normally a time of happiness and optimism but for one Murrow family, their celebrations were tinged with uncertainty for the year ahead.


Sarah Cox was featured in the Citizen earlier in the year after being refused a settlement visa to stay in the UK with her children. Now, despite the best efforts of her family and MP Steve Barclay, she has again been refused her visa.

The Cox family believe they have done everything that was asked of them, including Sarah’s husband Tim resigning from his £100,000 per year job in the Middle East to show how serious they are about settling in the UK.

But to their disbelief, just two days before they flew home for Christmas from Oman, where Sarah has to make her visa application, they received a rejection letter stating they did not meet the financial criteria.

“As a family, we have more than proven to the world that we are not a burden on society,” Tim said, speaking from his parents’ home where Sarah and children James (11) and Kimberly (8) live. He was due to fly back to the Middle East today (Wednesday).

The strain on the family is clear, with Sarah fighting back tears at the thought of having to leave her children for six months.

The simple answer appears to be for Tim to move back to the UK and get a job here, but he said with Sarah unable to work they would lose their house, as he would be unable to earn a similar wage.

Sarah is a trained theatre nurse and there are hospitals needing nurses with her skills locally. With both of them working, they could make ends meet but not with just Tim bringing in a wage.

Tim said: “I want to challenge the government’s interpretation of its own law, which I think is fundamentally flawed. There is no benefit to refusing Sarah’s visa. Would they be happy if I was down the dole office, signing on and asking them to feed my children and parents?”

The family are extremely unhappy with their treatment by the embassy in Oman and said they were messed around by officials and given the wrong information about how much money they needed to have.

Tim claims it was also not made clear that they needed to have had a certain amount of money in their account for six months prior to the application. This was one of the reasons for their visa refusal.

“If we had been told this at the start, we wouldn’t have bothered. Sarah could have applied for a visitor’s visa, got it in a few days and at a fifth of the cost. We wouldn’t have had to go through all this stress.”

Tim and Sarah are also concerned about the potential effect on their children. James poignantly asked for his Mummy and Daddy to be home safely when asked to write his Christmas list.

Both children are excelling at school – Kimberly at Murrow Primary School and James at Peele Community College in Long Sutton – and their teachers noticed a visible change in them while Sarah had to leave the country to make her visa application.

“They don’t understand,” Sarah said. “I am standing there with my suitcases and they are saying ‘Mummy, why do you have to go?’”

A spokesperson for UKBA said they are unable to comment on individual cases. Steve Barclay has raised the Cox’s case with immigration minister Mark Harper, who will be instructing his officers to review it.

Mr Barclay, who was praised by the family for his support, said: “There need to be tough rules on immigration in place and they need to be enforced, but at the same time there needs to be common sense. These rules were put in place to stop people abusing the system and being a financial burden on the state, but this clearly isn’t the case here.”

Link to original story –


New immigration rules accused of splitting up families UK (The independent)

Britons on low incomes are being forced to live apart from their families because of new immigration rules that rate their marriages as “second class”, campaigners say.

New Home Office regulations that have been in force since July mean millions of people earning less than £18,600 are unable to get visas for partners from non-EU countries.

Since the changes, thousands of British citizens who previously would have been granted a spousal visa are forced to choose between ending their relationship, splitting up their family or attempting to live abroad.

(The evil lady and the brain dead prime minister behind these rules – Teresa May and David Cameron)

The income threshold is above average earnings in parts of the country, including the north-east. Immigrants’ rights groups claims the new rules have created a two-tier system that rates the marriages of wealthy people higher than those of the less well-off.

Don Flynn, director of the Migrants’ Rights Network said: “Being able to start a family in your own country should not be subject to the amount of money somebody earns.”

“These measures create a two-tier system: those who are rich enough to live with whom they choose and those deemed to be too poor to live with somebody from abroad.”

Next week a group of cross-party MPs and peers will launch an inquiry, chaired by shadow Equality Minister Kate Green into the impact of the new family migration rules.

Speaking to The Independent ahead of the launch, Ms Green said: “Women, young people, people with disabilities will find its harder to meet this threshold and find it harder to bring in family members. We want to look at what the impact is on families and on community integration.”

Full story from the Independent


The Labour party respond to the conservatives heartless migration ruling.

In July Teresa May and the conservative party decided to announce a price for love,this price is £18,600,($30,000)if you have not been earning this amount you are no longer to see your wife or child,the following is a recent response by the labour party.

I have just received this e-mail from frontbench@new.labour.org.uk: Good afternoon Thank you for your email on new family migration rules; I apologise for the delay in coming back to you. The Labour Party cannot take direct action on behalf of individuals and recommend if you need specific case advice, to contact your MP. I thought it worth clarifying our position on this important piece of legislation nonetheless. …

At a time when our national finances are hard-stretched, we believe that it is only fair that anyone wanting to bring someone new to this country should be able to prove that they will not be a burden on the state. However, we believe that simply taking income as an indicator of someone’s ability to support their spouse is unreliable. After all, especially in today’s climate, someone on £40,000 today could all too easily be earning nothing tomorrow. So the taxpayer may still being exposed. In addition, in a world where far more people travel abroad and have friends overseas, there is a danger that such a policy could be unfair on those of modest incomes who genuinely fall in love overseas, perhaps with a high earner whose income won’t count under Government plans.
That’s why it might be fairer and more effective to insist that anyone sponsoring a partner into this country deposits a financial bond, which would be used to protect the taxpayer and meet any unforeseen costs that might be incurred, and which would be redeemable after a fixed period. Yet the Government didn’t even consult on this option. The Government needs to be honest about migration, only make promises they can keep, and sort out the mess of illegal immigration at Britain’s borders. Thank you for contacting us on this important issue. With kind regards Frontbench Communications Team On behalf of the Labour Party 1 Brewer’s Green | London | SW1H 0RG www.labour.org.uk
A recent letter sent to the conservatives –
I have got a meeting with my local MP next week as a result of this letter I sent a few weeks ago,it seems to have touched a nerve….
Hello Mark,Can you please tell me your thoughts on the following.Since July Teresa May has brought in a spouse threshold of £18,600,this means at present that my wife and son are not allowed to live with me until I reach this level.You responded with a generic response that has been sent to everyone affected by this.The element that I think has been forgotten by your party is the effect this will have on your unemployment levels.

I have just given up two taxable jobs to go and spend a few months with my son and wife in Asia.

When my small savings are spent outside of the UK I will return to the UK to look for work,I cannot work in Asia as I do not have a degree to teach,I can work illegally in my wife’s country but If I am caught I will be deported back to the UK,so I have no option but to work in the UK,save some money and then return to my wife and child in Asia,each time I return to the UK I will claim job seekers and housing benefit,this is the best part of £1000 a month.this may be for a few months or if the jobs market is not great it could be six months.

This cycle will continue for my family each time I return to the UK without them unless this new threshold is lowered and I can pay my own way for my family which is all I want to do.

The stats show that there are 15,000 families affected by this new rule,that means that the tax payer in the UK will pick up the tab for the best part of £15 million.

Facebook group: