Mrs Amy Hoose — Written evidence (FAM0010)
Introduction: I am submitting evidence as someone who has personally experienced the family migration route. As a non-EU spouse of a British partner, I have had to prove relationship, finances and accommodation through evidence in order to obtain visas to continue to live with my family. During the past five years, I have had a child, which changed my perspective on family migration. Although I had previously felt the task of visa application bureaucratic and an onerous but necessary task, having a child caused me to understand how high stakes family migration can be. Whilst my journey is only one individual story, I have tried to research and answer the questions as best as I can. To say nothing would be to become a bystander and would be disingenuous. It is my hope that by submitting evidence the system can be reformed and unified so that others will not have to face the same anxiety and uncertainty.
Design of family migration law
1. My understanding is that immigration law defines a “family” as a married, civil partnered or cohabiting couple with or without children, or a lone parent with at least one child, who lives at the same address. A “relative” is defined as the father, mother, stepfather, stepmother, son, daughter, stepson, stepdaughter, grandmother, grandfather, grandson or granddaughter of that person or of that person’s [spouse, former spouse, civil partner or former civil partner], or the brother, sister, uncle, aunt, niece [nephew or first cousin] (whether of the full blood or of the half blood or [by marriage or civil partnership)] of that person or of that person’s [spouse, former spouse, civil partner or former civil partner] in the Family Law Act 1996. I believe that across immigration pathways definitions of “family” and “relative” are more narrowly defined. For instance, Family visas are primarily for first degree relatives and not for aunts, uncles or former spouses. Parents can only currently be sponsored if they need long term care. The EU settlement scheme also defines “family” and “relatives” as being primarily spouses or civil partners or dependents. Tier 2 dependent visas exclude any dependents except partner, spouse or children. Tier 4 dependent visas are similar to Tier 2 dependent visas in definition. Graduate visas allow Tier 4 dependents to stay in the country but does not have a clear path for new dependent visas. On the whole, I think the immigration pathways are quite restrictive in regard to contemporary understanding of family units. For instance, an unmarried partner needs two years of cohabitation evidence to prove a relationship for dependent visas. However, if a person travels to the UK for a temporary Tier 4 (say for a Master’s Degree) and then receives a Tier 2 job, it would be difficult to be reunited with an unmarried partner as the Tier 4 visa would have broken the cohabitation requirement needed. Additionally, it is conceivable that a grandparent who is still independent would seek to join his or her family in the UK should no family remain in the original country. This principle would also apply to extended family (aunts, uncles, cousins, etc) who do not have a remaining network in their home country, but cannot be classified as a dependent needing care. I certainly think that in the case of grandparents with a grandchild in the UK the current law structure should be reconsidered. Grandparents often are vital to provide childcare especially in the current economic climate. Cutting families in the UK off from this resource has harmful economic and social impacts as it could cause one parent to have to drop out of the workforce to offset childcare costs.
2. Although I am not an immigration lawyer, from my lay perspective, the family immigration laws are not applied the same to every type of family. I cannot speak to the refugee path, though I understand that there are some bespoke pathways such as the Ukrainian path. In regard to the more traditional pathways, the spouse visa (leave to enter) and further leave to remain as a partner or spouse requires three means tests be met: financial, relationship and accommodation. However, this is not the same for dependents on tier 2 and tier 4 visas where the visas are given on the merit of their partner’s visa. Similarly, EU spouses or partners of EU citizens have separate pre-settled and settled status pathways. Even within pathways, rules are applied unevenly. For instance, if someone meets the three tests for a spouse visa they are put on a five year route to indefinite leave to remain, but if they do not meet these standards and have a child they may be put on a ten year pathway. All of these variations do need to be looked at in regard to fairness and the ultimate goal which is uniting families.
3. The financial requirement for spouses and partners (also known as the minimum income requirement) was intended to ensure that those coming into the UK on a family visa route would not be a burden on the state. The level of £18,600 was set as a minimum standard (single person - no dependents). However this number fails to take into account the other safeguards against the family member using state benefits. Generally spouses and partners on Leave to Enter or to Remain visas are unable to receive state benefits. They pay an IHS surcharge during the visa process to ensure access to the NHS. Furthermore, the UK partner becomes limited in regard to using public services as he or she would be unable to take advantage of tax credits and housing benefits. According to the Migration Observatory (University of Oxford) in 2015 more than 40% of British Citizens earned less than the threshold income with the split disproportionately disadvantaging females. This income requirement cannot be met with foreign earnings or with joint sponsorship. As a result, there has been a proliferation of Skype families who do not have the same quality of family life as those within the United Kingdom. If the true intention of this law is to stop migration to the UK and encourage British Citizens to only marry those who only have the same nationality, then it meets the brief. It is worth noting that the above requirement was not extended to EU citizens at the same time that the 2012 regulations were created. Since Brexit, those who qualify for settled or pre-settled status still are outside the above system. This undermines the legitimacy of the law. Why would a non-EU citizen need to be sponsored by a UK individual earning £18,600 when a non-EU citizen married to an EU citizen does not need the same minimum threshold? The Surinder Singh immigration route took advantage of the above discrepancy further discrediting the 2012 minimum income threshold. Additionally, this minimum income threshold continues to be taken into consideration for Further Leave to Remain. It is worth noting that spouse dependents on tier 4 and tier 2 do not need to meet the Further Leave to Remain income threshold. I think it could be restructured so that the minimum income threshold could be met through foreign earnings and joint sponsorship. Also, for Further Leave to Remain the minimum income threshold should not be applied unless there is evidence that the family has been using public benefits in the 30 months prior. Finally, these rules should be applied to all spouses and partners of those in the United Kingdom and not just UK Citizens.
How family migration policies affect society
4. According to the 2021 Integration in the UK report from the Migration Observatory, foreign born workers made up 16% of the UK work force in 2020. Although those on a family visa do not need to work as part of their visa requirements, many will contribute to the labour market. Crucially, family migrants are more likely to settle in the UK than those on work or student visas. According to the Migration Observatory, of the family migrants that received a visa in 2014, 69% received settlement or British Citizenship by the end of 2020. This means that family migrants stay long term and therefore have a long term impact on the labour market, recruitment, productivity and innovation. According to the Scottish government findings, a high proportion of migrants hold degrees. However, due to foreign career history barriers, migrants are statistically underemployed. Additionally, due to not being able to access benefits, migrant families are statistically more likely to have single family incomes.
5. From my understanding, most family migrants are not entitled to public benefits, and therefore would not impact these services. There are a few public services that they can access. In regard to the NHS, family migrants pay a surcharge on their visa enabling them to access this system. In a 2015 report from COMPAS citing data drawn from the UK Labour Force Survey, immigration did cause increased waiting times for outpatient referrals in more deprived areas outside London, but overall did not have significant effects on waiting times in Accident and Emergency and elective care. Family migrants may place more burden than other types of migrants on the NHS as this group typically has or will have children. In this way, we can also consider the impact of family migration on the education system. According to an ONS report in 2018, 15% of school children in London were born outside of the United Kingdom. This report also highlights that in 2017, there were around 189,000 births to non-UK born mothers in England. This does lead to increased pressure in regard to school places as well as in terms of ESL resources and teacher training. However, it is important to note that students can go to schools outside of catchment area in England. This should help ease that pressure. Whilst the two services above have undoubtedly been impacted by migration, both education and health services are key to ensuring the success of immigrant families. By fulfilling these fundamental human rights, families can contribute to society through the labour market.
6. ONS found in 2020 that migration had no significant impact on local authorities and did not recommend any redistribution of migrants between authorities. As stated previously, as family migrants often cannot access benefits at a local or state level, this is in line with what would be expected from such policies.
How migration policies affect families
7. In the case that families do not meet the financial requirements for a visa, they are often separated which puts the family unit under stress. As stated before, allowing for joint sponsorship or reconsidering the burden of the financial requirement falling solely on the sponsor could alleviate this stress and help families to not be separated for a long period of time.
8. There has not been much research on how family migration policies impact children separated from their parents outside of the refugee route. Scotland’s government published their findings on family migration in 2021. The report highlights disparities in income groups, suggesting that those children who might be separated from their parents may fall into a lower socio-economic status. Therefore, it seems facile to consider only the impact of separation on these children who may also experience economic hardships. However, in both cases, the breakup of the family unit imposes psychological distress on the child, which could lead to long term mental health issues. Previously, the government has defended its policy by stating that Skype can replace the physical family unit. According to a 2015 study from the Office of Children’s Commissioner for England (research carried out by Middlesex University with the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants), around 15,000 British children are living in a ‘Skype family’ due to the 2012 regulations. The Law Society of Scotland added to this research in 2019 positing that with Brexit the number of Skype families will increase. The impact of Skype families is effectively having children who would have had two parents growing up in a single parent household. In cases where the child is in the UK, this could have a long term impact on the benefits system. According to the Gingerbread campaign, lone families have the highest poverty rate among working-age adults, with 43% living in poverty. So, in fact, by trying to quell the use of public services by immigrants, the government is increasing dependence on services in the long term.
9. The family justice system exists to help families resolve problems quickly and aims to minimise pain for those involved. The family migration policies should also try and resolve problems quickly and minimise pain for those families within the system. However, I am not sure that it would be beneficial to have the two systems interacting with each other. Migrants may be unfamiliar with UK legislation and the UK legislative system. It would be quite intimidating to have to learn this system in addition to the UK immigration system. I think where the immigration system can learn from the family justice system is in approach and mannerism. For instance, hearings in family courts are private and the judge does not wear robes. The knowledge of compassion is a powerful tool. UK immigration should adopt this compassionate approach when dealing with families.
10. The current family migration policies and their implementation affect the integration and participation in British society of (would-be) sponsors and their sponsored family members negatively. According to a survey by the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin and the Association of Pakistani Physicians of Northern Europe in August 2020, 91% of respondents were stressed and anxious regarding the 2012 migration legislation and 60% felt that the policies adversely affected their work and professionalism. Crucially, 80% thought about relocating to countries with more family friendly policies. For those who family members who do finally arrive in the UK, their opinion of the UK will be forever marked by their separation experience as well as the 2014 modern hostile environment. The migration policies bifurcate society especially in regard to families. Employed family migrants who begin their families in the United Kingdom will have paid twice as much for the same NHS service as another pregnant UK woman. However, the migrant will be unable to use the Tax Free Child Savings Account Scheme for nursery as it is a government benefit. Both women (UK and Migrant) will experience the same life events, but through a vastly different lens. Whilst not universally true, it can be seen as natural for the migrant to not feel as integrated into UK society.
4 September 2022