Free Movement Weekly Immigration Newsletter #73

Welcome to the weekly Free Movement newsletter!

Two things happened last week that were covered by the media in a way that was incredibly annoying to anyone who values accuracy (hi!). The first happened on Tuesday morning and prompted an incredibly early start to my day as I thought I had better write up the Migration Advisory Committee’s review of the minimum income requirement quickly to make clear that article 8 was of little to no relevance, contrary to the reporting of the media. 

The next day it was the spending review, with celebrations all round of the Chancellor’s announcement that the use of asylum hotels would end by 2029. Context, however, is important. You won’t catch me cheering an increase in the use of sites like Wethersfield. And when I hear the phrase “cut the asylum backlog, hear more appeal cases and return people who have no right to be here”, I think of the extremely poor state of Home Office decision making at present, along with the fact that most people do not have lawyers to help them through the system. 

How confident are we that the people being returned actually do not have the right to be here, and are not being returned to persecution, when there is a very good chance that their case was never properly considered? There are better options than this. The use of hotels has to end and giving people the right to work while waiting for a decision is a practical step that would help achieve this without causing any human suffering, which is rife within the current proposals.

Elsewhere, the SRA’s policy on not accepting eVisas as ID for the SQE exams seems set to block refugees (and potentially other migrants) from sitting for the qualification. 

On the blog, it’s refugee week so today we have republished an explainer by Colin on the rights that people have under the Refugee Convention. Last week the latest tribunal statistics were out, showing yet another entirely predictable increase. 

There were also a few case write ups – a successful delay challenge, rejection of an asylum appeal on the basis that a Yemeni national could move to China, and some guidance from the Court of Appeal on sur place claims involving monitoring by the country of origin. 

For everything else on Free Movement and elsewhere, read on.

Cheers, Sonia

What we’re reading

In limbo: families kept apart by UK visa income rules – The Guardian, 10 June

Windrush scandal victims got less compensation due to lack of legal advice funding, review finds – The Guardian, 16 June

Ukrainians in the UK are facing a hidden crisis – PoliticsHome, 10 June

Being An Immigrant In the UK After Brexit – Journalismfund Europe, 10 June

Care worker immigration crackdown ‘will cost Reeves billions’ – The i Paper, 10 June

Another drop in UK net migration in 2026 may cause labour shortages, says No 10 adviser – The Guardian, 10 June

Investigation launched after deportee breaks free on Heathrow runway – The Guardian, 9 June

Olivia Blake: ‘Migrant children living in poverty is a hidden crisis’ – politics.co.uk, 11 June

Government strongly backs Home Office social work service as BASW seeks abolition – CommunityCare, 6 June

Reeves under scrutiny over claimed £1bn asylum saving given size of backlog – The Guardian, 11 June

Home Office backs down on asylum refusal for female Afghan activist – The Guardian, 12 June