United Kingdom

LeftishBrit

(41,303 posts) Tue Apr 17, 2018, 11:28 AM Apr 2018

Amber Rudd 'sorry' for appalling treatment of Windrush-era citizens

In the face of mounting criticism, Amber Rudd announced the creation of a new Home Office team, staffed by 20 officials, dedicated to ensuring that Commonwealth-born long-term UK residents will no longer find themselves classified as illegal immigrants. She promised that cases would be resolved within two weeks and application fees would be waived.

In a highly unusual acknowledgement that the government’s hostile immigration policy is having a catastrophic effects on individuals’ lives, Rudd said: “Frankly, how they have been treated has been wrong – has been appalling – and I am sorry. That is why I am setting up a new area in my department to ensure that we have a completely new approach to how their situation is regularised.”

She made a significant criticism of her own department, adding: “I am concerned that the Home Office has become too concerned with policy and strategy and sometimes loses sight of the individual. This is about individuals, and we have heard the individual stories, some of which have been terrible to hear.”

She said she was very sorry for the anxiety suffered by numerous people who arrived in the UK as children after newly tightened immigration laws required them to prove that they were here legally.

(More at link)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/16/theresa-may-caribbean-representatives-windrush-immigration

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Amber Rudd 'sorry' for appalling treatment of Windrush-era citizens (Original Post) LeftishBrit Apr 2018 OP

I'm glad it's being dealt with, but awful that it took so long LeftishBrit Apr 2018 #1

As the article says, some people ended up in detention centres muriel_volestrangler Apr 2018 #2

"significant criticism of her own department"?! Denzil_DC Apr 2018 #3

Amber Rudd 'didn't see' migrant memo T_i_B Apr 2018 #4

LeftishBrit

(41,303 posts)

1. I'm glad it's being dealt with, but awful that it took so long

Reply to LeftishBrit (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2018, 11:32 AM

Apr 2018

This comes directly from Mayhem's attitude as Home Secretary: xenophobic and nasty

Apart from all other considerations, it is disgusting that they suddenly tightened laws to apply retrospectively, to people who had felt safe for decades and then were suddenly told that they weren't. It seems to be essentially an 'ex post facto law', something which is forbidden in the American Constitution; but of course we don't have a constitution.

muriel_volestrangler

(102,483 posts)

2. As the article says, some people ended up in detention centres

Reply to LeftishBrit (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2018, 02:09 PM

Apr 2018

Radio 4's PM said one only got out when their MP intervened. Others have lost jobs, or healthcare. This is far worse than being caught up in endless bureaucracy. I think compensation is needed for these kind of cases (and immediate treatment for anyone that's being held for).

And there's this:

Home Office destroyed Windrush landing cards, says ex-staffer

The Home Office destroyed thousands of landing card slips recording Windrush immigrants’ arrival dates in the UK, despite staff warnings that the move would make it harder to check the records of older Caribbean-born residents experiencing residency difficulties.
...
The former employee (who has asked for his name not to be printed) said it was decided in 2010 to destroy the disembarkation cards, which dated back to the 1950s and 60s, when the Home Office’s Whitgift Centre in Croydon was closed and the staff were moved to another site. Employees in his department told their managers it was a bad idea, because these papers were often the last remaining record of a person’s arrival date, in the event of uncertainty or lost documents. The files were destroyed in October that year, when Theresa May was home secretary.
...
The Home Office added that in deciding immigration cases, it considers alternative documents, such as tax records and utility bills, as evidence of ongoing residency. “The disposal of registration slips would therefore have no bearing on immigration cases whereby Commonwealth citizens are proving residency in the UK.”
...
Home Office staff members have been reluctant to consider alternative records, such as National Insurance contributions, unless they are presented within a dossier of papers proving residency every year for decades. People who have been classified as being in the UK illegally are often unable to put together the evidence, and cannot afford legal assistance.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/17/home-office-destroyed-windrush-landing-cards-says-ex-staffer

People are told that you don't need to keep tax records for over 7 years. And why the hell would you keep utility bills longer than that? They can't be used as proof of address if they're over a year old.

Part of the problem has been a requirement to provide four pieces of evidence for each year that a person has been in the country.

Windrush migrants must prove they have been in the UK since 1 January 1973, when they were granted the right to stay in the country permanently.
...
It has not been using central tax and pension records that would prove someone has been working to support their application. Instead, the current system relies on people having kept their own documentation including payslips and bank statements dating back to the 1970s.
...
"One of my clients who had lost the passport she used to enter the UK as a child with indefinite leave was refused confirmation that she had retained that status in spite of her having supplied the Home Office with a copy of the passport," he added.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43795077

4 items from 45 years ago? How many of us could do that? I'm presuming family photos wouldn't count. They really do seem to have designed the system to screw the people who have been here legally for decades.

Denzil_DC

(7,942 posts)

3. "significant criticism of her own department"?!

Reply to LeftishBrit (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2018, 03:21 PM

Apr 2018

Why, it's as if somebody else was responsible for running it!

John Reid as Home Secretary many years ago said the Home office wasn't "fit for purpose". It still isn't, thanks to mismanagement by Labour and the Tories under May and now Rudd. This was the result of a deliberate set of policies to make the UK a hostile environment for "incomers", not a case of "mistakes were made".

I doubt anything would have happened to address the Windrush scandals if not for dogged reporting by the likes of the Guardian's Amelia Gentleman and the government's embarrassment at the coincidence of the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit, where May initially refused to have the matter discussed at all.

"This is about individuals", eh? Well every week we hear another horrible tale of a family ripped apart or forced to leave the country, having done their best to comply with the rules in the face of shifting goalposts and an inhuman bureaucracy - it's not just the Windrush generation.

I'm with David Lammy. Shame on May and all those who've sought cheap votes by pandering to the racists among us.

T_i_B

(14,800 posts)

4. Amber Rudd 'didn't see' migrant memo

Reply to LeftishBrit (Original post)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 03:17 AM

Apr 2018

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43931118

Home Secretary Amber Rudd has apologised for not being aware of "specific" migrant removal targets.

The Guardian reported a leaked memo dated last year, which suggested she had been informed of those targets. In a series of tweets, Ms Rudd said she had not seen this memo and apologised for not being aware of the objectives. Ms Rudd added she would make a statement to the House of Commons on Monday in response to "legitimate questions" about illegal migration.

The Guardian reported that the leaked memo from June 2017, copied to Ms Rudd, set out Home Office targets for achieving 12,800 "enforced returns" in 2017-18. It also said that they had exceeded targets for "assisted returns".

On Wednesday, the home secretary had told MPs investigating the Windrush scandal there had not been targets for migrant removal. She later admitted "local" targets had been set before telling the Commons on Thursday she had not been aware of them.

Reply to this discussion