£25,700 Maintenance Requirement from June 2012 according to Leaked Cabinet Letter

[AnAmericanInScotland]

Originally Posted by manny.j

That technogarble, in simple English, means: To target people who although love to come to the UK and live there but refuse to put any efforts in integrating into the British society. And I don't mean drinking (I am joking here! ) but more specifically able to speak and understand English. The goal is to reduce the multiculturalism and encourage them to integrate into British lifestyle. But its confusing to mix sufficient maintenance (i.e have enough funds, I guess) with integration as one does not need money but intentions to integrate

I almost went to law school, chose statistics instead, lol. But those old tendencies to see potential for problems in language stick with me after all these years

So I have to wonder when they put something like that in-how broad a brush will end up being wielded?

I do understand the main aim to to seriously dent the influx of immigrants who have no intention of learning to speak conversational English, and will expect shocking 'cultural dispensations' and access to the public funds gravy train. (Which would be some mean feat seeing as our 27 month probationary periods are specific that we have no access to public funds in the first place...)

However, what exactly do they mean by integration, and how are they going to quantify, what criteria will they apply to determine a certain income level to ensure better integration?

I agree that approaching this from a solely economic basis is erm, a head scratcher. Too many variables, and so far by page 23 nothing I see indicates that the committee considered the real variables.

And I got a real laugh out of the part where they mention the whopping four written responses they got to their call for input. Four? Really? That's kinda scary!

[manny.j]

Originally Posted by AnAmericanInScotland

I almost went to law school, chose statistics instead, lol. But those old tendencies to see potential for problems in language stick with me after all these years

So I have to wonder when they put something like that in-how broad a brush will end up being wielded?

I do understand the main aim to to seriously dent the influx of immigrants who have no intention of learning to speak conversational English, and will expect shocking 'cultural dispensations' and access to the public funds gravy train. (Which would be some mean feat seeing as our 27 month probationary periods are specific that we have no access to public funds in the first place...)

However, what exactly do they mean by integration, and how are they going to quantify, what criteria will they apply to determine a certain income level to ensure better integration?

I agree that approaching this from a solely economic basis is erm, a head scratcher. Too many variables, and so far by page 23 nothing I see indicates that the committee considered the real variables.

And I got a real laugh out of the part where they mention the whopping four written responses they got to their call for input. Four? Really? That's kinda scary!

The Life In the UK Test and also English lesson tests (ones that come from nations where English is not the main language) are two means to test the foreign spouse, both contribute to their requirement of Integration. This, in my opinion, is a legitimate issue but they, as we have seen from the independent body's recommendation, are more concern about money than integration. But they have used the theme of integration as the underlying reason to introduce these new challenging rules but so far have failed to come up with strong rules to encourage or enforce integration.

Income level, however, has nothing to do with integration, the intentions here is simply to discourage a UK spouse to marry and bring in a foreigner into the UK. They cannot say this openly as its none of their or anyone's business who an individual marries but they can passively influence this by these tough rules.

[AnAmericanInScotland]

Originally Posted by manny.j

...Income level, however, has nothing to do with integration, the intentions here is simply to discourage a UK spouse to marry and bring in a foreigner into the UK. They cannot say this openly as its none of their or anyone's business who an individual marries but they can passively influence this by these tough rules.

I think you just hit the nail on the head. I skimmed a few pages ahead whilst waiting for the potatoes to boil, and saw that at £30,500, 75% of applicants would fail.

[BailyBanksBiddle]

Originally Posted by AnAmericanInScotland

I think you just hit the nail on the head. I skimmed a few pages ahead whilst waiting for the potatoes to boil, and saw that at £30,500, 75% of applicants would fail.

As an American your application will probably be considered differently than someone from a place they'd like to stop people immigrating from. You're probably in a better position than many from the Commonwealth. The government can't say that however.

[AnAmericanInScotland]

Originally Posted by BailyBanksBiddle

As an American your application will probably be considered differently than someone from a place they'd like to stop people immigrating from. You're probably in a better position than many from the Commonwealth. The government can't say that however.

I agree, to a point-when looking at the tables in Chapter Three ranking the number of successful applications granted, the US comes in third-although the numbers of successful US applicants show a significant difference between First and Second places, it's still a Third place ranking.

I've skimmed ahead and so far don't see a table indicating rankings of which home country had the highest numbers of successful applicants going on to become a '...burden on the State...'-something I'd think would have been an important consideration.

But that's just my stats background talking, I think. I know that my husband and I now meet the proposed income requirements (he's returned to the workforce, coming out of retirement solely to ensure that we do meet those proposed levels), and to be straightforward, I am fairly comfortable that I have integrated. We attend church, do volunteer work, and have solid friendships here.

I'm just a little nervous about some of the language in the report and the potential that language has to influence the determination of criteria. LOL, don't mind me, as I wrote above, I think that's my stats background+the former interest in contract law rearing it's pointed little head.

[BailyBanksBiddle]

Originally Posted by AnAmericanInScotland

I agree, to a point-when looking at the tables in Chapter Three ranking the number of successful applications granted, the US comes in third-although the numbers of successful US applicants show a significant difference between First and Second places, it's still a Third place ranking.

I've skimmed ahead and so far don't see a table indicating rankings of which home country had the highest numbers of successful applicants going on to become a '...burden on the State...'-something I'd think would have been an important consideration.

But that's just my stats background talking, I think. I know that my husband and I now meet the proposed income requirements (he's returned to the workforce, coming out of retirement solely to ensure that we do meet those proposed levels), and to be straightforward, I am fairly comfortable that I have integrated. We attend church, do volunteer work, and have solid friendships here.

I'm just a little nervous about some of the language in the report and the potential that language has to influence the determination of criteria. LOL, don't mind me, as I wrote above, I think that's my stats background+the former interest in contract law rearing it's pointed little head.

I think I've integrated here. I pay UK taxes. I like spending time with most of the people I've met, I enjoy the food, like my local pub, love rugby and am fascinated by cricket. I'm fluent in English, passed the LITUK test in 5 minutes flat (personal best?), have the same head of state as the UK, take numerous weddings, funerals, and christening services, regularly lead assemblies at two local schools, and speak at various civic events. I'm a Church of England vicar, and with stipend, savings, free housing, and other "benefits in kind," my income meets the minimum the government requires. But if the new changes come into effect, I might as well be unemployed: My wife has a Ph.D. but has been unable to find a permanent position here, much less one that pays £25,700. As well, we're getting quite bored of living under this cloud of the current government. So unfortunately I'm becoming more and more resigned to moving to Toronto, and then maybe visiting the UK again in another 75 years. So by this time next year most of my entries might be on the Canadian site (although with the size of Canada, the state of immigration there probably won't reach that of the UK's until the year 3000)! Happy Easter!:::flock :

[AnAmericanInScotland]

Originally Posted by BailyBanksBiddle

I think I've integrated here. I pay UK taxes. I like spending time with most of the people I've met, I enjoy the food, like my local pub, love rugby and am fascinated by cricket. I'm fluent in English, passed the LITUK test in 5 minutes flat (personal best?), have the same head of state as the UK, take numerous weddings, funerals, and christening services, regularly lead assemblies at two local schools, and speak at various civic events. I'm a Church of England vicar, and with stipend, savings, free housing, and other "benefits in kind," my income meets the minimum the government requires. But if the new changes come into effect, I might as well be unemployed: My wife has a Ph.D. but has been unable to find a permanent position here, much less one that pays £25,700. As well, we're getting quite bored of living under this cloud of the current government. So unfortunately I'm becoming more and more resigned to moving to Toronto, and then maybe visiting the UK again in another 75 years. So by this time next year most of my entries might be on the Canadian site (although with the size of Canada, the state of immigration there probably won't reach that of the UK's until the year 3000)! Happy Easter!:::flock :

Happy Easter to you and yours!

My husband is a retired conservation officer and was shocked to be offered work recently at a salary that should put us in the clear. His field isn't the most well-paid. I'm amazed and saddened to read that a Ph.D is having difficulty finding a permanent, commensurate position, that's a lot scary frankly! Would she be able to find work back in Canada?

There were a couple of articles on The Telegraph regarding the changes the Home Secretary is hoping to implement, primarily the end of the abuse of certain human rights clauses. Not much in the article about those of us in settlement situations, though, just that the changes should be in place by summer:

Judges ordered to end 'right to family life' farce - Telegraph

[apples333]

Excellent thread with some very good information and input by many.

I for one in a way am for this rule to come in as I have seen many people from Pakistan and India come to this country and obtain status and then go on to claim benefits and use the people and this country for their own benefit. This is only my opinion and what I have seen and experienced and I am not saying that everyone who comes over here is like that....but can understand why this government wants to crack down hard on this matter.

Too bad they did not crack down more before the recession began...where so may lost their homes and families through repossession...and debts and so on...but that is another debate for another time I guess.

I have been reading information on what they intend tos et as a threashold and it is not certain yet...but many say the income level would be set at approx £25,000.000...then I read this:

The MAC suggests, instead, a minimum gross income figure to support a two-adult family of between £18,600 and £25,700. We estimate that nearly two thirds of sponsors would not have sufficient gross income to meet the higher of these thresholds.

so not sure..could be between 18 -25k? will have to wait and see

[BailyBanksBiddle]

Originally Posted by apples333

Excellent thread with some very good information and input by many.

I for one in a way am for this rule to come in as I have seen many people from Pakistan and India come to this country and obtain status and then go on to claim benefits and use the people and this country for their own benefit. This is only my opinion and what I have seen and experienced and I am not saying that everyone who comes over here is like that....but can understand why this government wants to crack down hard on this matter.

Too bad they did not crack down more before the recession began...where so may lost their homes and families through repossession...and debts and so on...but that is another debate for another time I guess.

I have been reading information on what they intend tos et as a threashold and it is not certain yet...but many say the income level would be set at approx £25,000.000...then I read this:

The MAC suggests, instead, a minimum gross income figure to support a two-adult family of between £18,600 and £25,700. We estimate that nearly two thirds of sponsors would not have sufficient gross income to meet the higher of these thresholds.

so not sure..could be between 18 -25k? will have to wait and see

I think the idea behind these policies may be good, but the rhetoric and sweeping delivery of them is quite reckless. I suspect the problem many people have is that it's more of an issue of keeping a political promise to reduce immigration to the 10's of 1000's by 2015 than addressing a concern that is actually pressing. Not keeping political promises is absolutely deadly for a party, as it always comes back to bite in the end. So the rhetoric and thrust has to be fierce, as we've seen.

If you've followed this thread, you've noticed that most if not all who are writing are not looking to claim benefits. They are people on their own benefit who are paying UK taxes, having accepted the rule that they cannot go on benefits for two years. Yet even then, their goal isn't to go on benefits, but to settle and make a life for themselves and their families. As well, people looking to claim benefits can come from anywhere--not only the Indian subcontinent. In your opinion, would you prefer people from Australia or Nigeria to come to the UK and claim benefits to those from the Indian subcontinent? There are many people settled in the UK from India and Pakistan who are quite rich, and can run financial circles around many born and bred British. So is it a question of culture or cash? Or both?

Thirdly, as you know, the present recession that you referenced was not caused by immigrants, but by poorly managed futures and loans originating in American banks, going back to the late 1980's. In a world economy--especially in dealing with a player with as large an economy as the USA--Europe and the rest of the world will be affected. I own an apartment (or flat if you prefer) in Manhattan, and know a bit about how terribly competitive banks were to grant mortgages to prospective buyers for real estate that is absurdly overpriced. I also know the stats that the ones who defaulted least on their mortgages were foreigners, who in New York City, own the more expensive properties!

Putting all the weight on the sponsor and not counting savings or the applicant's actual earning power is a contradiction really. What if the applicant held savings upwards of £10,000,000 but had a British partner who stayed home to mind the children? The maintenance requirement of the sponsor is in place to support the applicant until he/she can find steady work. Work then can lead to building savings. It is massively dim and myopic for the government to think otherwise--unless they want a country filled with people blowing their paychecks from one week to the next, living hand to mouth.

The problem is that these "reforms" are too sweeping and not investigative enough from one applicant to the next. Spending the money on improving checking each applicant would prove to be a far better and long-reaching investment. To be fair, no one should be allowed to enter the UK or any country for that matter, with the intention of claiming benefits and not contributing positively to the society and culture in some way. As well, dishonest people involved in sham marriages should be caught out by their vicar or registrar, and be denied permission to go forward, and if necessary go to prison. These are some of the reasons these proposals have been put forth. But the government's plan coming into force as it is will result in honest people being caught up with the fraudsters. And this tragic and dangerous hazard could be avoided if the concern moves out of the sphere of the political into that of the social. Then it will move beyond mere party politics into effective governing.

[Joppa]

Originally Posted by apples333

Excellent thread with some very good information and input by many.

I for one in a way am for this rule to come in as I have seen many people from Pakistan and India come to this country and obtain status and then go on to claim benefits and use the people and this country for their own benefit. This is only my opinion and what I have seen and experienced and I am not saying that everyone who comes over here is like that....but can understand why this government wants to crack down hard on this matter.

Too bad they did not crack down more before the recession began...where so may lost their homes and families through repossession...and debts and so on...but that is another debate for another time I guess.

I have been reading information on what they intend tos et as a threashold and it is not certain yet...but many say the income level would be set at approx £25,000.000...then I read this:

The MAC suggests, instead, a minimum gross income figure to support a two-adult family of between £18,600 and £25,700. We estimate that nearly two thirds of sponsors would not have sufficient gross income to meet the higher of these thresholds.

so not sure..could be between 18 -25k? will have to wait and see

Out the range of options as recommended by MAC, the government appears to have gone for the top, at £25,700, according to the leak.