I have heard that a deadline of 7th July 2006 has now been imposed on the Home Office. This is with regards to the thousands of families who have made an application under the IND's one-off audit exercise where families who initially applied for asylum before 2000 will be granted indefinite leave to remain (ILR). Can anyone tell me about the latest developments with regards to the Family Amnesty?
2006-07-04 00:00:55 · 5 answers · asked by ? 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
The status of some of those whose claims have failed has since been regularised through the amnesty announced by the former Home Secretary, David Blunkett, on 24 Oct 2003. This granted Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR - effectively settlement) to all applicants who applied for asylum before 2 October 2000 and had at least one dependant child born before that date and still under 18. The government have declined to say how many people have so far qualified for this amnesty (House of Lords answer 4713 of 11 Nov 2004). Their press briefing at the time mentioned 50,000.
This is lifted from the website below - it does not give you the latest status of the amnesty but you may be able to obtain that info from this organisation. I assume getting the info out of the HO is like getting blood from a stone!!
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/whatsnew.asp
2006-07-04 00:35:26 · answer #1 · answered by daniel m 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
On a purely humanitarian point the girl has my sympathy. On a logical point she must be deported, she isn't our duty. As stated by way of others, there are a lot of our own voters being denied scientific care inspite of the variety of immigrants employing the provider. Charity particularly ought to start at homestead. I even have an trouble-free answer that could help in the direction of lowering the two the topic concerns in the NHS and the stages of immigration. particularly no unfastened healthcare or advantages/tips or training for that count given till a minimum of 5yrs have been spent paying into the gadget. difficult i comprehend, yet fairer than what's happening now. it may be common to demonstrate screen by way of way of the Inland gross revenues gadget. each and all of the "unfastened-loading" could end and a few who can not help themselves financially for a minimum of 5yrs could think of a minimum of two times till now bypassing all the different countries to get to ours.
2016-12-14 04:09:27 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No but why should illegals be allowed to stay. Why should asylum seekers not return to their own country when safe. Could it be this Labour government has given them so much going back would affect their lifestyle against the free the support we give them?
2006-07-15 10:03:23 · answer #3 · answered by deadly 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Illegals need to be deported, not given amnesty.
2006-07-18 13:33:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2006-07-15 09:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋