Family divided across Atlantic by ‘inhumane’ migration rules

Guy and Stacey Bailey bonded over a shared love of The Smiths. The couple met back in 2004, and theirs was one of the first online romances, conducted between continents: the British indie-rock band were part of Guy’s national DNA, but Stacey lived in Atlanta, US.

Nine years later, they are happily married with a five-year-old son, Vincent. They have lived in the UK and the US, but decided to move back to Mr Bailey’s hometown of Stockton-on-Tees in March so that their son could start school in Britain.

But new family migration rules brought in last July, which require British citizens to earn a £18,600 salary before their non-European Economic Area (EEA) spouse can live in the UK, mean that Stacey was forced to stay in Atlanta until Guy found a job. She had to miss her son’s first day at school last week.

The government has a clear objective to reduce net migration, but the way it’s pursuing that is extremely damaging. Migrants’ Rights Network

The new migration rules have been widely condemned by campaigners, but also by parliamentarians across the political spectrum. And on Monday, Conservative MP Andrew Percy will lead an adjournment debate on the issue.

“I want to highlight the injustice of it,” he told Channel 4 News. Mr Percy says the law is penalising those on low incomes – and that includes some of his constituents in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

One is a street sweeper, who earns £300 below the threshold. “He has far more left over to support his wife and child, both out in south east Asia, than if he lived in London on £19,000,” Mr Percy told Channel 4 News. “If you happen to be in love and a street sweeper, then you’re not entitled to find love outside of the country.”

The number of families affected by the new rules has not yet been recorded. But the government’s own estimate, projected before the new rules were introduced, puts the number of Britons affected at 18,000.

EU vs UK

The Commons debate follows a damning report from the all-party parliamentary group on migration which concluded that the minimum income threshold was separating thousands of British citizens from their families, and called for an urgent review.

Under the new rules, a British citizen wanting to sponsor a non-EU spouse’s visa has to be earning £18,600 a year. This rises to earnings of £22,400 to sponsor a non-EU child, and £2,400 more for every additional child.

On top of the strict income requirement, families say the rules are restrictive and give no leeway for legislators to be flexible when judging individual circumstances. For the Baileys, Stacey’s previous four-year employment history in the UK was not taken into consideration. Nor was the fact that her in-laws could act as guarantors and were happy for the family to stay with them.

Perversely, the strict rules do not apply to EU citizens, who are able to bypass British regulations and could live in Britain with a non-EEA spouse even if their salarly is below the UKBA threshold.

“I’m the first to say we need a firm and fair immigration system,” Mr Percy added. “I’m not questioning firmness: I’m questioning fairness. I want them (the government) to look at this income element, and to either revisit that, or look at practicalities of some regional variation.”

Families kept apart

Mr Bailey said the separation has been emotionally difficult for the whole family. “We have Skype, Viber, email. We speak every day, but (for Stacey) it’s not the same as seeing Vincent and sharing his day,” he told Channel 4 News. “She said: ‘He’s grown since I’ve last seen him.’

“We say (to Vincent) that she’s gone back to sort out the move, and to send over his toys.”

The separation also put enormous pressure on his hunt for a job that paid over £18,600 in the north east. Eventually he found a company willing to increase the original salary from £18,000 to £19,000, and the couple can now start the process of applying for a spousal visa.

‘Unfair, arbitrary and inhumane’

But campaigners are also concerned about a growing backlog of cases that have been put on hold by the Home Office after a high court ruling on 5 July which cast doubt over the new rules’ infringement of the principle of the right to family life.

The Home Office is appealing the judgement, and in the meantime has suspended any decision-making on applications that would fail the visa income requirements.

If you happen to be in love and a street sweeper, then you’re not entitled to find love outside of the country. Andrew Percy MP

The Migrants’ Rights Network hopes Monday’s debate will highlight the damaging impact of the new rules, which its director Ruth Grove-White called “unfair, arbitrary and inhumane”.

“The government has a clear objective to reduce net migration, but the way it’s pursuing that is extremely damaging,” she told Channel 4 News. “The (impact of) family migration policy one year on shows how ruthless the government has been.”

The campaign group BritCits has collected the stories of over 160 couples and families who have been affected by the visa rules. A spokesman said they have been shown to have a “very negative impact on the families of British citizens”.