A central plank of its attempt to look tough on immigration was a new rule, introduced by the Home Office last year, which meant that British citizens or others settled in the UK who want to bring a foreign spouse into the country have to show that they are earning more than £18,600 a year. This was a fixed figure, regardless of circumstances, and it was more than three times higher than the previous rules required. Those applying for spousal visas have always had to show that the family will be able to maintain itself without recourse to public funds, but this was the first time a specific income figure had been set. And it was set so high that it was bound to be an impossible requirement for many ordinary hard-working people. Someone working full time on the national minimum wage, for example, would only earn just over £13,000 a year. In the current climate of low wages and high unemployment, this was a cruel policy bound to separate genuine families.
At the time the policy was introduced we warned that it was likely to breach Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. Our briefing on the proposed changes to the rules said:
“At best, this will lead to more legal challenges and foster uncertainty in the UK’s immigration system. At worst, the Rules will be struck down in the Courts if they are found to be incompatible with Article 8. On closer analysis these proposals have more to do with cutting net immigration, regardless of the consequences for genuine families, than discouraging abuses or reducing burdens on the British taxpayer.”
Well, we don’t like to say “we told you so”, but we told you so. The High Court ruled last week that the income requirement was a disproportionate interference with the rights of British citizen sponsors and refugees to enjoy respect for family life. Mr Justice Blake said that aims relied on by the Government – protecting the economy and transparency – could not justify a rule that “very severely restrict[s] the ability of many law abiding and decent citizens of this nation who happen not to earn substantial incomes in their employment from living with their spouses in the land of their nationality”.
So now the Government must rethink and change the policy. Of course it should have done this when the proposals were first suggested and we and many others said they were unfair. Pushing through a bad policy in order to look tough has only caused delay, confusion and more hardship to families, not to mention the enormous amount of wasted public money.
