Upcoming debate

‘A Dividing Issue: The Immigration Debate in Context’ (1.00pm, Saturday 2 November 2013, Lady Mitchell Hall, Sidgwick Site, Cambridge)

Link to tickets (free): https://immigrationdebate.eventbrite.co.uk/

This panel discussion for the 2013 Festival of Ideas brings together experts from a wide range of backgrounds and positions, who will cut through the slogans and politicking to reveal a more objective picture of immigration policy in 2013. David Goodhart (Director, Demos), Habib Rahman (Chief Executive, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants), Michael Kitson (University of Cambridge), and Sarah Fine (King’s College London) will consider the immigration debate from a diverse variety of angles. Panel discussion and Q&A chaired by Professor Loraine Gelsthorpe (University of Cambridge).

More details and tickets can be found here: http://www.cam.ac.uk/festival-of-ideas/events-and-booking/a-dividing-issue-the-immigration-debate-in-context.

Facebook event page: https://www.facebook.com/events/381187045318167/?fref=ts

For any further information on the event, please contact Ed Anderson (ea320@cam.ac.uk).

Report on the Family Migration rules released

The APPG on Migration has released it’s much anticipated report into the family migration rules.

The report is available here, which the FIA contributed a summary of its testimonials submitted to.

This represents a landmark in the campaign and an extremely useful resource for us in the forthcoming activity to overturn the rules.

Free movement have also revealed the outcome of a freedom of information request, confirming a 20% increase in refusals to female applicants.

On the 9th July, ‘Divided Families day’, many of us will be gathering to protest against the rules, on the anniversary of the implementation last year – more details will follow. But in advance of this, please do take action to make the full impact of these rules known.



Research requests – make your story count

I’ve received a couple of research requests from people looking for interviewees. If you’re interested in helping out and making your experience contribute to greater insights on the impact of the family migration rules then please email us: familyimmigrationalliance[at]gmail[dot]com

  1. Surinder, at the University of Birmingham writes:

    I am a lecturer in Social Work at the University of Birmingham and am interested in issues of race and gender in particular, including gender and care within the family.

    Having read the testimonials on your pages it is clear that the immigration processes in the dominant, economically advance countries pose significant obstacles in family relationships, particularly between couples.

    My particular emphasis is on looking at how family members (including couples/spouses) take care of each other across borders – in the context of being transnational families.  It involves parents making care arrangements for children and children arranging care for parents and the obstacles that they encounter as well as the  opportunities that the new technologies may offer.

    Against this backdrop, my specific requirement is whether it is possible to advertise through you about this research and/or if you could point me to testimonials which may include some of these aspects.

  2. Ana, at University College London writes:
    I am studying an Msc in Global Migration at University College London (UCL). 
    In order to complete my Master’s degree, I am writing a dissertation about the family reunification rules. As a migrant myself, married to another migrant, I am particularly interested in three things. First, I want to examine the context in which the rules were formulated and constructed (especially ‘the immigration cap’). Second, I will analyze and question how the rules imply that the rights to family life and to migrate are reserved to those who can afford it, although they were created allegedly to secure the benefits of British citizens. Finally, I am interested in the implications that the rules have for the debates about citizenship and migration.
    In order to do this, I am analyzing speeches and newspapers, following some blogs and forums, and will conduct interviews with affected families, as well as some organizations that have been involved. I hope that I can publish part of the research results in some manner to support the campaigns against the rules.
    In this context, I would like to ask whether it would be possible to publish a small ad on your website so the affected families know about this research, and if interested, share their stories with me in late June or July. All the stories would be treated anonymously if so desired. I am also flexible in any other requests, including that I travel outside of London to conduct the interviews if necessary. The interviews would help to reflect a more in depth analysis of the consequences of the rules. 
    I am happy to discuss this further by e-mail, telephone or over coffee, as well as to answer any questions regarding the research or myself.  


Most of us suffering under the rules are reduced to skype and have to deal with difficult distances in their relationships – please take this opportunity to share your experiences and how you deal with the distances.



A positive signal

Here is a really useful and concise research briefing of the family immigration rule changes for MPs, published today in the House of Commons library: http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06353

It covers the details of the changes, rationale and motivations etc to date. Most encouragingly the role of the FIA in promoting the experiences of sponsors has been acknowledged as part of the civil society response to the changes; and the view of the FIA, during the announcement of the changes in July, is even quoted at length within.

After a year of campaigning on these rule changes, it’s a sincerely positive signal that the objections of sponsors is becoming a recognised part of the discourse on this issue. And although as a blog and campaign we seem to have missed our first birthday (30th November…!) this acknowledgement stands as anniversary enough for the leaps and bounds made by sponsors in opposition to the rules, in just 6 months since they came into force.

For the scale of the task ahead of us, the work being put into the campaign is beginning to pay off. So please continue to post your stories and updates, and ask others you know suffering under the rules to share their stories here, and submit them to the Brit Cits pack of case studies being circulated to MPs and the media; as the attention they’re receiving is on the rise.


Divides and Rules

Recently the family immigration campaign has circled around a debate about the fairness of the rule changes in comparison with other migrants.fia12.png

Immigration is a political issue, and a divisive one at that. There are those that want restrictions increased to relieve perceived pressure on the state and job market, and those that think they are ineffective and unhelpful for Britain’s economy and culture.

Family immigration I have always viewed as a unique area in this debate – since the main thrust of the campaign against the rule changes is a moral one; not identified by economic or cultural arguments. Indeed, the economic arguments used in justification for the rule changes we have repeatedly dismissed as pointless in light of ‘no recourse to public funds’.

But to criticise other sorts of migrants as somehow responsible for the axe falling on British sponsors is to bark up the wrong tree. A statement being often repeated, socially and now in the media, is that other European citizens have a greater right to family life here than British citizens. While this is true, it certainly isn’t their fault, and it is extremely important not to interpret this as foreign citizens being favoured over British citizens. It’s a point that I believe risks undermining and distracting attention from our intentions, towards one of EU membership and reducing the rights of citizens and non citizens to the lowest outcome – that if ‘we’ can’t have families then ‘they’ shouldn’t either.

Before July 2012 we all had a right to a family life, qualified in different ways. Then, that right for  British citizens became qualified beyond all practicality – while the government was unable to affect change on the rights of EEA nationals. But it would be an act of extremely misguided faith to suggest that withdrawal from the EU, and subsequent restrictions on EEA nationals would bring back the right to a family life to British citizens. One must remember that with ‘no recourse to public funds’ already a criteria for family sponsors, it is only the desperate act of saving face that is driving the rule changes, so the government can claim to meet it’s manifesto pledge on reducing net migration. Diminishing the rights of EEA nationals (by withdrawing from the EU or otherwise) would only help them preserve their reputation; not exchange one group’s rights for our own. This is not least because the government plans to abolish the Human Rights Act itself – locking out even further human rights protections, than the ones sponsors are denied already.

The truth is, family reunification has been a staple part of the EU’s human rights framework for decades. The European Convention on Human Rights is the bedrock of domestic human rights protections in the EU’s member states – including Britain. It strikes me that if the EU can sustain protections for a private family life, even while it bears down on its own borders, then there is no reason why British citizens should not be appealing to this higher principle – that we are Europeans too (like it or not), we have these rights in other member states, so why not in our own country? – It’s a far more rallying cry to me than ‘if we aren’t allowed a family life, then they shouldn’t be allowed one either’.

Our campaign simply cannot be allowed to fall into camps over European nationals – their rights haven’t changed, it’s ours that have. As such, European nationals represent the standard that we are striving to restore – by arguing that we should attempt to strip European nationals of their right to a family life, is to consign our own struggle to redundancy; since we will all then be eligible for a means-tested non-EEA relationship in the UK.

In my view, it’s precisely the obsession with sovereignty over home affairs which has resulted in such unfair measures being exacted against sponsors; while all other European nationals have better protected rights, derived from a European level.

The greatest disservice we could do to our fight and to other sponsors and families is to start carving up migrants as the deserving and undeserving – and with such laudable aims, it would be dangerous to leave ourselves vulnerable to divide and rule within the wider immigration and EU debates. We all have the right to a family life under the UN Declaration of Human Rights; one which needs to be realised fully for British citizens and residents too. Pointing the finger at others won’t strengthen our argument, but merely chip away at the credibility of our cause.

Finally, one thing we lack is optimism, and understandably so. When cheated out of a family by your own government, it’s easy to scorn others who have not. So I want to appeal to EEA nationals to join the campaign to restore the right to a family life for British sponsors too, 1) because tensions between Britain and the EU may recoil onto your rights too, and 2) because you demonstrate and exercise a standard of rights we once shared, and long to have back.



Migrant and Refugee Women of the Year

Just a quick plug for this annual award: http://awards.migrantforum.org.uk/nominate/

Check it out and nominate a woman you think deserves credit for their services in improving the standing of migrants!




Transnational Families Documentary

Hector Ulloque, documentary filmmaker from Colombia, based in France, is looking for participants for a documentary about transnational families.

This project is produced by the Medio contención producciones (www.mediodecontencion.com), a Colombian production company in which directors and researchers share their professional and academic experiences.
We are looking for families that would like to participate in our documentary project. Families scattered in geography, living in different countries due to the migration of one or more of its members. Families separated by thousands of kilometers, but that succeed in having a constant communication and sharing their family rituals through several media, especially by Internet.
We had the opportunity to see your blog. We want to make contact with women and men belonging to transnational families in different parts of the world and eventually to invite them to participate in the project.

If you would like to know more about our project don’t hesitate to get in contact with us.

Hector Ulloque