7 responses

1. It’s all quite odd. Under the Pakistani Immigration Rules men may sponsor women for spouse visas but women may not do the same for their husbands!!!

   There aren’t any language tests though …

   It’s easy to get a business visa, not a lot of capital required.

   One would hope that the worse case scenario would be that Pakistanis, Bangladeshi and Indians will have to do better to educate their people so that we can speak English better than we currently do.

   Had Dominion Status been accepted by Indians in 1928 (Simon Commission etc.) then we would all have been British: and would speak and hear English better.

2. There should really be an exemption for spouses of British passport holders to take the test abroad.

   With a pass rate of 79% surely its worth scrapping the English Tests in India, its just not cost effective.

   ECHR claims will surely take up a lot of time in the appeals sytem due to this new requirement. I’m not sure the UKBA has enough HOPOs left to deal with this after the recent round of redundancies.

3. I’m still hoping the argument about the sledgehammer and the nut of unidentifiable size (Quila) would apply here as well. After all, if UKBA can’t show any evidence that English language tests contribute to the “legitimate aim” of fostering integration and do so in accordance with the principle of proportionality, then surely the policy must be flawed.
   On the other hand, FM is right: judges won’t go against the government’s policy and, if I may add, especially not in the current climate of hostility towards human rights…

4. That video ! God All Mighty ! But in all seriousness, our senior case worker is far more measured in Court, well most of the time . . . . . .

   FYI – no HOPO’s were made redundant, some of the old guard took paid early release. The majority of the redundancies (or redeployment to use home office euphemism) hit the case working ‘factories’ in Croydon, Sheffield and Liverpool, but thank god the current economic climate has not robbed Mr T or an internet connection, savior of insomniacs the world round.

   I struggle to see how this English language test is necessary or a priority at the moment, all a rather silly distraction from more pressing matters. Will it lead to more work for “immigration lawyers” ? we will have to wait and see I suppose.

   PO

   1. Welcome back, PO, haven’t heard from you in a while. I’ve heard of a few of the old guard departing, which comes as a surprise (and a real shame in some cases) when there are so many courts with no PO once again. Even asylum cases aren’t guaranteed a Presenting Officer, at least in London.

5. Asylum cases havn’t been guaranteed a PO for about 3 years now have they?

   Give it time and there weren’t be POs for deportation appeals.

6. Deportation still is given highest priority, followed by bail and then asylum coming third. The birth of the all singing all dancing (and too often granting) asylum case owner in 2007 saw less HEO’s doing court.

   2009 saw the herald of ‘Local Immigration Teams’, fragmenting enforcement offices, more teams, more managers, less people going to Court and so on.

   However fast track are due to undergo mass expansion, so watch this space…..