Do you have anything to declare?

News today that the UK also has a problem with visitors overstaying their visas and remaining in the country illegally adds to a list of countries that worryingly cannot trace visitors, and can only presume are still present in their borders.

The UK policy on immigration has come under the spotlight this week as the Labour party was accused of not being clear on their aims and reasons, some quarters claimed the party had “led the country up the path of mass immigration without explaining the benefits.”

The policy which has been at the forefront of Labours’ time in power, and was unquestionably a personal manifesto of Tony Blair’s time in office, is being questioned as commentators try and understand why certain parts of society are empathising with the BNP.

The question being asked is how has the British National Party grown to getting two seats at the European parliament? Although this is seen as an insignificant number, the issue still remains that certain parts of the country do have sympathy’s with the view of the party.

This view that immigration is a bad thing for the UK is in contrast to that of the current government, it is thought that understanding of the benefits of immigration is key to the issue.

The new problem of people overstaying their visas has become an international debate with some estimates putting this form of illegal immigration above any other. The US claim that half of the illegal’s inside their borders arrived on tourist visas and overstayed. The view that this is happening around the world, with no solution apparent must be worrying for the governments of these countries.

Although stiff punishments for being in certain countries illegally are in place, this is obviously not a deterrent. The fact that people are willing and able to travel to a country, and then operate there without the proper permissions, is a fact that has been established. The question of how to prevent it, however, has not.

Short of putting tracking devices around everyone’s neck that enters every country you are never going to control people’s movements. The amount of money involved in detaining, then deporting these people once caught, as well as other costs, raises the question of whether the system in place is workable. UK immigration, like the rest of the world for the moment has to accept that some people entering legally will go on to stay illegally.

It is coming to an Immigration office near you soon.  That might be a bold claim but you have heard it here first.  There is NO WAY the UK BIA can afford to continue to pretend their current policy of denial is working.

As I write this an Immigration somewhere is leaving the Home Office and they are not being replaced.  The budget is going to be slashed.  It has to be slashed and even with all the money they have received over the last few years the UK BIA have failed to address the 400,000 people in the UK who want to make the UK their home.

The BNP now have a seat and the simple reason is because the government have failed in their Immigration control.  It is time to get serious and get on and start the amnesty. 

The UK can not afford to continue to avoid the facts that an Amnesty would be beneficial to the UK Plc.  Added taxes, less benefits and more resources could be freed up to focus on protecting the boarders.

If you believe an Amnesty would be beneficial to the UK I want to you to post your reply.  Together we can send a message.  I am the Director of Global Visas with over 20 years experience in Immigration law and I want to be the first person to say Today is the day the UK BIA MUST declare their amnesty.

In 2007 I said the UK Immigration needed an Amnesty.  Since then the BNP have won seats, the UK BIA have made no progress and the system is still failing.  The UK Government have to stand up now and accept the facts.

Please join me with your comments – I want to see an Immigration Amnesty in 2010.

Detention centres are no place for school kids

Unofficial statistics reveal that over 1300 child migrants were held in immigration centres across the UK over the past 15 months. The statistics were in a letter from the UK immigration minister Phil Woolas to the Scottish National Party’s Pete Wishart.

The news has shocked many commentators on UK immigration, and has ignited debate on whether under 16’s should be treated this way, in what is generally considered a tolerate country for immigration.

The US policy on illegal immigrants is similar in that they are held in detention centres before being deported, as you would expect there are no official statistics for under-16’s held in these centres.

This being the case, last month Barack Obama announced plans to overhaul US policy on immigration centres in the country, saying that detainees will no longer be held like prisoners but instead in converted hospitals and old hotels that will act more like check-in points than prisons, allowing detainees to continue their lives until their case is heard.

While this is a step in the right direction for a country that has typically been accused of poor policy on immigration, the UK has always been thought as more of a liberal country in regards to immigration.

The case of Ibrahim Ssentongo, four, was publicised this week. The youngster from  East Ham, London, has been resettling to life with his family after a traumatic time in the Yarls Wood detention centre in Bedfordshire. Seven months since he was locked up the trauma of the 51 days he was away for are very much at the front of his mind

Since being released from Yarls Wood, Ibrahim, has become quieter, more within himself, he is now prone to tears. Ibrahim was born in the UK, yet now finds every day trips frightening and often refuses to walk down the street.

Stephen Ssentongo, Ibrahim’s father, who is from Uganda says:

“When he sees people in uniforms of white shirts and black trousers, like bus drivers or security guards in shopping centres, he thinks they are guards from detention. He wants to hold your hand or to stand in front of you, so that you will hold him. He is scared.”

This story and hundreds like him surely have no place in the UK and are more like tales from a Dickensian era than the 21^st century. Now that these have come to light it surely now lies with the government to address the issue of detention centres for under-16’s?

There is no place for the BNP in society

The UK Evening Standard had published an article relating to the creeping popularity of the BNP in the country and how the government were somewhat to blame. They had lost the “white working classes”, through unclear policy and misunderstandings on UK immigration. The article is a level headed appraisal of why the BNP have some empathisers; it does also remind me that this country is not the nationalist disaster some countries are in 2009.

I would not put Australia into this category, however, I was alarmed at the tone and the underlying lack of empathy for the Sri Lankan ‘boat people’, the articles topic, currently adrift of the Australian coast. The writer in question abhorrently held the view these people in no way should step foot on Australian land.

Why I found it to be a very insightful article by Tony Travers in the Evening Standard was also the reason I found ‘The Australian’ writer in dire need of some education into Australian immigration.

The brainless-ness of the article seemed to have escaped whatever editorial team they have in place for that particular paper and they would be best advised to gain a better understanding of immigration and the benefits it can bring to a country.

Most migrants are hard-working and what ever place they settle benefits from this and the new creativity this brings. Although some migrants, when they first arrive, are unskilled they will surely have offspring that will thrive in a country that gives them the opportunities to achieve what their parents never had the chance to.

Again it would come back to the respective governments, who have not been clear on the immigration effect and why it is important for economic growth. I am sure the article writer in Australia is guilty of the same mis-guided views as some people in the UK, and that is that migrants are somehow depriving them of something.

Until governments start explaining the good of immigration and the payback it brings for the areas that provide homes for the new arrivals, then views such as those expressed by the BNP and certain papers, as unfortunate as it is, will be listened to.

Immigration is a global issue now

International immigration is big news to western countries around the world and skills shortages in numerous key sectors have been highlighted recently, countries are simply not producing enough skilled workers to keep up with projected growth. This has led to a ‘skills race’ as different countries vie for workers from around the world to fill the gaps, these gaps are set to become exasperated in 10 years time.

The deficit can be summed up in the uncomplicated way as to say that the amount of jobs in 2020 (for sectors such as IT, nursing etc.) will far outweigh the amount of professionals in the relevant field in 2020.

With Microsoft boss Steve Ballmer recently praising Canadian immigration on the basis that they have developed immigration policies in line with this trend, does Canada immigration have the edge at the moment in relation to luring this highly valuable labour force to their country?

Canadian immigration policies have certainly made it easier for people to immigrate to Canada; they have introduced a number of immigration practices that currently other countries, especially the US, have yet to emulate.

The question however I am more interested in is can country’s really make themselves more appealing for immigrants or are these things just pre-ordained? I’ll give you an example: Australia is a beautiful country, it’s hot, there are plenty of beaches, and a similar value house will be much larger etcetera etcetera. What can the Australian government do to make it the choice over other countries, apart from make it easier to gain a work visa? I don’t think there is much else.

Another example is the news story that an Australian has been jailed for 4½ years (sorry to pick on Australia), after an attack on an Indian student studying on an Australian visa, again although you can claim a country can crack down on such things, I can’t see governments taking a direct approach purely for immigration purposes.

Considering this and the skills shortage I don’t hold up much hope for the UK’s economic growth. Of course we are in Europe which is a big advantage, although when pitted against countries that have beautiful weather and where you are taxed a lot less, our need for skilled professionals may hit a brick wall. Projections are very hard to have any firm arguments on, although it would be interesting to know figures involving our skills shortages and the projected way the UK government plan to meet those shortages, I can’t help but think the only way will be to pay more for those workers than countries like Canada or the US.

It is, I think, a point that is all to clear to the government, the mechanics of which must be very complicated. Economic growth is dependant on workers to make that happen, if company’s will have to pay those workers more money than other foreign businesses, won’t this make them highly uncompetitive in the global marketplace?

Sure professions like nursing could be subsidised by the government, but there is no way the private sector could be part-funded by government.

So in this day and age where most people are anti-immigration it is a strange modus operandi that governments need to think of any way they can to get workers in the country. This year saw record numbers of people enrolling for degree courses in the UK, perhaps this is the secret method in which the British government aims to plug the holes? Because a strange thought struck me the other day, I’ve never met or even heard of a Canadian that has emigrated to the UK, have you?

The consequences of overstaying your US visa can be serious to say the least. A case I recently came into contact with was a 40 year old woman from eastern Europe, although she had now left the country she had overstayed her original tourist visa and worked illegally in the US for 17 years.

Her quandary was whether she would now be allowed back into the US. She went on to explain that she had indeed worked illegally but always with a valid social security number, so had always paid taxes through her stay in the country. It also transpired that her father now lived in the US, and had actually progressed from the US visa he had originally arrived on and was now a US citizen.

In hindsight I think the fact that her father was now a US citizen made her wonder what would have happened if she had gone through the correct channels, she confessed to me that she knew that she certainly wouldn’t be in the situation she found herself now. The lady was desperate to return as she had built up a life for herself in the country and regarded it as the place she called home.

I told her the news that because she had overstayed her original US tourist visa and therefore was illegally in the country, for much more than the standard penalised amount of a year, she would receive an automatic 10 year ban from entering the country. When I explained that because she had left voluntarily made now difference, except to alter the fact that the ban may have been increased to a permanent ban if she had been forcibly removed, she realised that she had made a huge mistake.

This echoes cases of people deported from America every day, over 300,000 a year, who have built up a life for themselves, but were always looking over their shoulder in case Uncle Sam was watching, knowing that eventually the day may come that they would have to explain their situation to US immigration.

So what now for the people that can no-longer return to the place they think of as home? Most will re-settle in their original countries, some more easily than others, what is clear however is that it is not straight-forward in the slightest. US immigration statistics state that a majority of people deported simply try to re-enter the country through the US’s land borders, meaning a whole new can of worms is opened with more added uncertainty and human traffickers entering the equation.

Overstaying your visa is a risky business

There was news this week that tourist visa overstayers to the country cannot be traced, are the right wing US immigration brigades then directing their energies at the wrong border controls?

Traditionally it is the Mexican border that receives the most column inches in regards to US immigration, with the figures showing that in fact half of the illegal immigrants in this country came in by plane, what hope is there to eradicate illegal US immigration.

The US policy to immigration is draconian to say the least, people found to be in the country illegally are often kept in prison-like complexes until deportation. Quite often these people have established lives for themselves in this country and have legitimate jobs where they pay taxes, ok so those legitimate jobs are obtained deceptively, the fact remains they were contributing to the economy.

The actual act of immigration is never going to be stopped in the US, mainly from under privileged countries, it seems however that a country built on immigration has turned it’s back on the hand that built it and no longer wants to play ball, feeling that it is now fat enough from foreign labor to possibly stomach anymore.

This is in stark contrast to our northern neighbours, Canada, that this week and every month as far as one can remember proposed new plans for the benefit of immigration into the country. Canada is currently seeing more growth and resistance to the recession than any other western country, while seeing some of the highest rates of legal migration.

Criminalising people for wanting a better life for themselves and their family seems a last ditch attempt by our government to hang on to its dated policies on immigration. If people are going to do it anyway, should some new laws be introduced or process be set-up to have some control, or at least structure, in what is meant to be one of the most developed countries in the world?

A person scales a fence at the Mexican border

An article in the FT today states that in Canada “Declining birthrates are not keeping pace with the demands of the growing economy.” This will mean that all net labor growth in Canada will be attributed to immigrants in 2011.
With this in mind it is no wonder that Jason Kenny, Canadian minister for immigration, announced this week new laws to improve the welfare of temporary foreign workers and less restrictions on Canadian work visas.

Canada’s thirst for foreign workers is unlikely to be quenched as the economy in Canada rides out the recession and continues to grow. It is worth noting as well that during the recession demand for Canadian work visas has not wavered and remained constant.

Taken the need for foreign workers Canada is turning into one of the most cosmopolitan and multi-cultured countries in the west. Although not spread equally across the country, ethnic diversity in the built up areas remains the bigger picture. Canada’s population is made up of 19.8% of its residents having been born outside of the country, compared to the US with 13% and the UK with 10.1% in a 2006 survey.
In Toronto more than half of its 2.5million residents were born outside of Canada, with 150,000 arriving every year.

Canada’s approach to immigration is positive and one feels necessary for the economy. Due to asylum claims, visitors from the Czech Republic and Mexico now need to conform to new visa requirements, so while Canadian immigration are willing to accept new workers, often on temporary working visas, the country’s approach to new permanent citizens is a little blurred.

After being in office for just under a year, Barack Obama seems to be making important progress for US immigration procedure.

This week his office has announced that it is to overhaul the US immigration detention system, a massive step away from George W. Bush’s administration.

At the moment people without the necessary US visa requirements are held in prison like centres, most times actual prisons until they come in front of US immigration to argue their case for staying in the country. The problem with this is that most of the people being held haven’t actually committed any crimes, yet are being held in prisons.

Obviously this should have happened a long time ago, on a human rights violation, but with the Bush administration they clearly had other priority’s, after all how many failed asylum seekers or immigrants are then going to challenge the super power that is the US on how they were held before being deported?

It’s worth noting that there is a vast number of people coming through these detention centres every week, there are 30,000 beds and 370,000 immigrants are held each year, so each immigrant is being held for approximately a month.

What makes this worse is that most of the people being detained have often been working in the country for a significant period of time, paying taxes the whole shebang, all they want to do is conform to the conditions set and hopefully remain in the country, these people are highly unlikely to not go to court. Granted a small minority are actual criminals but a difference needs and hopefully will be made.

The new plans are to start using re-purposed hotels and nursing homes as places of detention, new measures would be drawn up to allow detainees many more civil liberties than they currently receive. This will also have the added advantage that it will save the American Government $86 per night, per detainee. I’ve put the figures all out for you as I’ve worked it out and I don’t quite believe it myself.

One bed for the year- $86 x 365 = $31,390

There are 30,000 beds being used all year- $31,390 x 30,000 = $941,700,000

So when you put it into this context is Obama fighting for the human rights of the detainees or has his Government found a way they can re-coup some of the money they bailed out the banks with?

As we are constantly being told ‘this is the age of the mobile classes.’ The last decade has seen airports and airplanes getting bigger, while passenger numbers and US visa applications move in a steady upward curve.

With the news this week that UK company British Airways are to axe 1,700 jobs and a report by the Australian Minister for Immigration, Chris Evans, saying that numbers of people applying and getting Australian visas are down, are these not conflicting reports of the state of travel in this ‘mobile age?’

As you would expect with the advent of people being able to afford to travel more freely and a increase in applications for US visas, there has been a explosion in companies all competing for their custom.

With the new breed of budget airline, big companies such as BA have had to see their once monopolized market become highly competitive. Because of this, company’s such as BA and others like American Airlines, were forced to diversify and set themselves apart from cheap choice airlines, they also didn’t have much choice, the new airlines were run much cheaply, because of this big companies were marketed as a better quality, more premium choice. The ramifications of which are being felt now as we continue in a economic downturn.

With this in mind it is no wonder a company such as BA have announced plans to cut costs.

The news that a large airline are cutting jobs and wages won’t be a popular one, especially since US visa applications remain steady, however, with the airline industry more competitive than ever and the economy as it is, you can expect more cuts and job losses across the board, as all the large ‘premium’ airlines struggle to cope with the ever increasing reality of passengers’ necessity to travel cheaply.