Updates, commentary, training and advice on immigration and asylum law

Poor people to be prevented from marrying


Older content is locked

A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more


By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;

  • Single login for personal use
  • FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
  • Access to all Free Movement blog content
  • Access to all our online training materials
  • Access to our busy forums
  • Downloadable CPD certificates

Theresa May has announced that people considered by Bullingdon Club alumni David Cameron and George Osborne to be ‘poor’ will be prevented from marrying or living together in the same area. In order that individual assessments need not be made, a threshold of £18,600 is being set to define poverty.

Where poor people break the spirit of the new law and do have children together but do not marry, a new form of exclusion order will be sought to prevent them from living in the same area as one another in order to make their lives as difficult as possible. The policy will act as a disincentive to being poor or to having children if poor. It is intended to encourage the poor to marry into the middle classes. As a result less poor people will then have children, with considerable economic and social benefits to the rest of the population.

Theresa May, Home Secretary, said:

“We are doing this for the good of the country. Poor people have been causing social unrest and diluting our nice middle class culture for long enough. We expect poor people to think ahead rather than acting impulsively and irresponsibly. If they cannot find someone from the middle classes to marry and have children with, they should stay single and childless.

It is not about reducing the numbers of poor people as such, it is about economic necessities during these difficult times. We accept that some children will be left without parents as a result of this tough but necessary measure. That is a price worth paying. It will mainly be poor fathers who are prevented from seeing their children because women are less likely to earn the minimum income, but that’s OK because a mother’s place is in the home anyway and poor women should find nice rich husbands who are middle class instead, like in the old days.

If poor people do not like this, they can go and find another poor country to live in together where they will feel more at home, like Greece or Pakistan.”

A spokeman for poor people said that the attack on the poor amounted to a policy of eugenics and it was quite unlikely that poor people would simply stop falling in love with each other or having children just because some rich politicians would prefer that they marry middle class people who can support them. The spokesman added that the policy ran totally contrary to the Government’s normal support for traditional family values and was going to be a social disaster leading to an increase in single parent families and child poverty.

When contacted for clarification a Home Office spokesman denied that the measure was aimed at poor people as such:

“No, no, you’ve got it all wrong, this is about foreigners so it is OK. Also people who like foreigners and half-foreign children, but they’ve only got themselves to blame. A few nice photogenic white people might get caught out as well as all the ethnic minorities, but they won’t vote for us anyway. If you swap out the words ‘middle class’ for ‘British’ then you’ve pretty much got it, though.”

Relevant articles chosen for you
Picture of Free Movement

Free Movement

The Free Movement blog was founded in 2007 by Colin Yeo, a barrister at Garden Court Chambers specialising in immigration law. The blog provides updates and commentary on immigration and asylum law by a variety of authors.


15 Responses

  1. While the above article lampoons the present government’s fiscally-driven attitudes to human rights and immigrants, the simple fact of the matter remains – immigrants are an over-used scapegoat when the only immigration the UK can control is immigration that typically serves our national interests.

    We should not turn away from the border the fee-paying students, research scientists and nurses and it is not in the public interest to deny spouses and partners of their rights to be together.

    Are the government simply embroiled in a long-standing PR exercise to win hearts and minds at the polls?

  2. I can’t believe what I just read! This seems like a line from the 19th century where people were less tolerant of any race. Years from now, the public shall look back at this statement and be horrified.

    1. Hear hear! And ideally requires a Gov’t which understands fundamentals like the separation of powers rather than desiring to tell the courts how to rule etc. etc. etc.

  3. Is it fair that the Home Secretary wants to abolish the 14 year rule leading to ILR on 9th July 2012 and replace it with a 20 year wait that allows you to begin 10 year process? Thus if you have waited for 13 years as of today and waiting for one more year, you now have to wait for 17 more years? If you have kids here how are you going to cope? Please show some compassion Mrs May.

  4. Oh come on people – this is clearly fabricated and a joke. Not even Theresa May is that stupid – although she’s bloody close and it makes my skin crawl that narrow-minded idiots such as her are in positions of power. Truly disgusting.

    1. Gareth
      Its in the statement of intent on the UKBA website.
      20 years to start a route to settlement. 4 FLRs before the ILR, thats a lot of money.

    2. Im just devastated after reading this article,im married to a brit girl love her to bits got a year old son with her as well,but she cant earn 18,600 per anum means we will never be togather?i cant eat cant talk just suicidal how cud they do such a salfish act,show me any other country in the world they got such a tuff immigration policys??

  5. @gareth woods: I hope you’re right. I wouldn’t be surprised if you aren’t, though. It’s not that dissimiliar to the bullshit I’ve heard from a few ‘nice’ middle-class folks, all talking behind closed doors. Then there’s the fact that politicians live in a state of hyperreality where people who aren’t comparable to said politician are worthless non-entities. Likewise with large numbers of the public who, willingly or unthinkingly, follow a similiar pattern of pseudo-ethics.

    Troll article or not, there are people who genuinely think like this. There’s a big element of truth in there. Maybe we should laugh harder for it; it’s meant to be funny because of its truths. To be honest, though, the joke’s bad marmite. Some people will stomach it but most of us will be mad, not at the article but how easily this type of shit could wind up happening.

    This master troll, he is masterful.

  6. C’mon, I can’t believe that anyone would be so gullible as to believe this article.

  7. The thing about this satire is it is real and is happening to immigrants from outside the EU. Wake up, people, this is your government at work!