Updates, commentary, training and advice on immigration and asylum law
Poor people to be prevented from marrying
THANKS FOR READING
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
TAKE FREE MOVEMENT FURTHER
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.”