I also honestly categorically disagree with the idea that the changes are "more moderate than the rhetoric." The 5 to 10 year rule change is Ruins Lives type stuff. - ThreadSky

dov.bsky.social • 1 day ago

I also honestly categorically disagree with the idea that the changes are "more moderate than the rhetoric." The 5 to 10 year rule change is Ruins Lives type stuff.

Reposted from Steve Peers

And it's reinforced with the other rhetoric: "squalid", "incalculable damage". Starmer made a choice not to go with "balancing" language. Whether he's an actual Powellite or just cosplaying as one, it's unconvincing and unpleasant. The "hygiene" issue for politicians works both ways.

Comments

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

As a casual example that I literally encountered today: a friend's partner is Belarusian. The rule change means she will have to go back (yes. to fucking Belarus!) to renew her passport at least once before she is entitled to permanent residency due to the rule change.

comradecrev.bsky.social•1 day ago

Yep, I have a friend who was already worried about this with the old 5 year rule. Now it's gonna be even worse.

alexsaysstuff.bsky.social•1 day ago

Are there no embassies still open she could renew it at?

wanderlib.bsky.social•1 day ago

You're still talking a fairly significant risk.

There's a reason the road outside the Saudi Embassy is named for Jamal Khashoggi.

alexsaysstuff.bsky.social•1 day ago

For sure, but I assumed an embassy in an EU country might be safer than one in Turkey.

wanderlib.bsky.social•1 day ago

You would hope.

But the UK and EU haven't exactly responded muscularly to autocrats targeting and killing their dissident residents.

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

"Not our citizen not our problem"

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

They changed policy in Belarus since the invasion of Ukraine began to require people who are renewing passports to come home, presumably precisely to trap them.

alexsaysstuff.bsky.social•1 day ago

Huh, I assumed they would want to continue extorting money from the diaspora via passport renewal fees the way the Assad regime did.

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

The exodus of young educated folk after the suppression of the 2020 uprising harmed the regime's economy quite dramatically so I would imagine they're trying to find the maximum amount of methods to get them back by any cost

tatilujan.bsky.social•15 hours ago

I had to spend a significant amount of time in Colombia before having been in the UK for 10 years fue to my father getting cancer and then dying. I would not have felt free to do so without having permanent residency.

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

I hope I do not need to explain, however fragile the brains of migration restrictionists may be, why it is a bad idea for a young woman of dissidentish politics to travel to Belarus at this time.

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

Like for instance, speaking very politely but also not unharshly: some of us don't consider "restrictive at a slower pace than some rivals" to be a useful definition of "more liberal."

christianh.bsky.social•1 day ago

You also have to just fundamentally question the political logic of this sort of policy/messaging combo since you are really only pissing everyone off. Diet Enoch Powell speech with relatively ineffectual policy tightening is something that appeals to literally nobody on top of being bad policy.

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

Yes, that's kinda OP's point: but I would argue that at this point it is inaccurate. The policy /does/ change things dramatically and ruthlessly harm innocent people.

christianh.bsky.social•1 day ago

I mostly mean ineffectual in terms of the stated goal of bringing down immigration numbers. It's almost certainly going to be cruel and obnoxious at the individual level, but without achieving the apparently desired change in the aggregate.

megalodondada.bsky.social•1 day ago

Crucially, it harms innocent people in a way that will do nothing to address even a single xenophobic complaint. I understand that for political reasons Labour can't say "only racists care about this" but I would like to believe they understand that it's true!

dov.bsky.social•1 day ago

UK immigration policy exists as a whole, not as some sort of gradual vector of change. If it is made more restrictive, that means Starmer is less liberal than May. It's kind of that simple.

paperghost.bsky.social•1 day ago

also they completely whiffed it at first mention of family visas. the MIR is currently stuck at 28k while MAC produces a report, a 28k figure the tories pulled out of thin air, which is currently *well in excess* of the tory 18k - which itself ruled out like 45% of people for a spouse visa

heartinamber.bsky.social•1 day ago

'The social care visa is a gift to exploitative employers, therefore we will make it harder specifically for people on it who otherwise haven't done anything wrong to ever get off it. I am a socialist btw'

elrondcupboard.bsky.social•1 day ago

The 10 year change is entirely performative (and pointless) cruelty for the sake of it

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply