Immigration: Skilled Migrants from Commonwealth Countries Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Woolley of Woodford
Main Page: Lord Woolley of Woodford (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Woolley of Woodford's debates with the Home Office
(3 years, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberTo ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of reports that highly skilled migrants from Commonwealth countries who have lived in the United Kingdom for 10 or more years have been refused indefinite leave to remain.
My Lords, we do not believe that highly skilled migrants who came to the UK using the tier 1 general visa route have been incorrectly refused indefinite leave to remain. There have been many cases of applicants appearing to deliberately misrepresent their earnings to qualify for leave to remain. We are giving applicants opportunities to respond to these concerns, and each case is being considered on its merits.
My Lords, my understanding of the Home Office data, supported by the Migrants’ Rights Network, shows that all highly skilled migrants who have been refused indefinite leave to remain are non-white and from six Commonwealth countries in south Asia and Africa. Given that the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed that 60% of all online self-assessment tax returns have discrepancies—the main reason for their refusal—can the Minister explain this worrying racial disparity, particularly coming after the Windrush review?
My Lords, I absolutely refute that this has anything to do with the Windrush generation. The noble Lord points out that a large proportion of the refusals were given to non-white people; the countries represented have populations that would normally be non-white—that is the link there. People falsified earnings: quite often, amendments were made to tax returns over three years after the original returns and often less than six months before making the ILR application.