Live Brain Family Deportation Urgent Question Questions and Statements

statement updating the steel industry, and are very heavily

subscribed main debate today. So the time limits will need to be strict

late enforced. Mr Ian Blackford. -- strictly. To ask the Secretary of

State for the home Department if she will make a statement on the

impending deportation of the family from Dingwall?

Ministers do not usually comment on individual immigration cases however

I am happy to waive this convention today, to properly address the

question raised by the honourable gentleman. N Brain came to the UK in

2011 on a Visa which expired last year in May, with her husband and

son listed as dependents. On the 25th of May, Katherine Grainger

applied for another Visa, -- Catherine Brain. In June this was

granted to December of last year. In December than application was made

for leave to remain under Article eight of the European can not human

rights, which was refused with an out of country right to appeal. This

time has been open to them to make a skilled worker application under the

points -based system. On the 12th of April a exceptionally extended the

grace period after the leave expired, during which a valid

application could be made to the 11th of May. I subsequently extended

the grace period further, to the end of this month, upon hearing he had

submitted a job application with an appropriate employer. We have not

yet received an application from the Brain family for leave to remain

under the points -based system, but we will consider any application

they make. I am meeting the honourable member this afternoon

again to further discuss this matter, but he can be assured that

the family does not face an imminent risk of immediate deportation. It is

important we recognise the excellent offer the UK have. There is no limit

on the number of international graduates remaining in the UK today

work, to provided they can secure a graduate level job. I look forward

to meeting him again later today to discuss this matter. I am grateful.

I must say that the question we took was to the Home Secretary, and it

was the Home Secretary who was briefing the Chancellor of the

Exchequer when he responded to my right honourable friend the Member

for Moray a prime ministers questions. When the family came,

they came under the fresh talent initiative that was put in place by

the previously bid administration in Edinburgh, with the support of the

Home Office. That is the commitment this government made to those coming

to Scotland in 2011, and what has happened is that the government has

taken retrospective action to deny the rights of these family -- this

family would have been granted under that legislation. There is a breach

of trust and faith as far as this government is concerned. I want to

help the Minister insofar as the number of people who came under the

fresh talent initiative has dwindled to virtually nothing, what we are

asking is for the government to recognise the commitment that this

family have made to the Scottish Highlands, specifically when I look

to Lachlan, a seven-year-old boy, Gaelic education in the Highlands,

writing and reading in the Gaelic language. He does not write and read

in English. He speaks good English, but it is different to be educated

in a different language. The thought of reporting that young boy to

Australia where he will be two years behind his peer group, is shameful,

and that is where the human rights aspect of this comes in. Catherine

has now been offered a job in a start-up business, and new

distillery in Dingwall, which will offer jobs and prosperity not just

to her, but to others. We need to recognise that they should be given

that rate to stated a. Give them the time to qualify for the tier two

Visa, show some compassion. Do the right thing today. The honourable

gentleman will know that I have met him on previous occasions to discuss

this case. And he says that I should show compassion and humanity. He

will know that I have already exercised discretion, not once but

twice, in relation to this case, on the basis of representations he has

made on the half of the family. I will listen very carefully to what

he said, and I look forward to meeting him later to hear more of

the details that he has relayed to the House this morning. But I would

wish to correct and is likely on some of the facts that he has

presented. He said the family came here under the fresh talent scheme,

but that closed in 2008 and was replaced by the Post study work

scheme, which, yes, was closed by this government, and we announced

that on the 21st of March 2011. The Brain family arrived on the 14th of

June 2011. There are very clear issues that we do consider about

Post study work opportunities, removing from the tier for study

route into Tier two, and I am pleased to note that around six

thousand people who did that -- 6000 people who did that, the information

is available. It is important that the Scottish Government continues to

play its part on creating an enterprising economy to create those

jobs and opportunities for his constituents, so that provides that

route for people who do study at our universities to have that graduate

employment, because ultimately the previous arrangements existed and

did not work. They allowed abuse to take place and saw people moving

into low skilled employment not reflecting the education they had

obtained. But I do wish to reflect further on the comments he has made

today, and I look forward to meeting him later. There is no one more

passionate about having a robust immigration policy than me. But I

wondered whether or not the Minister would agree that this may be a case

where the government is being overly harsh and people from outside of the

European Union as a direct consequence of having free movement

of people from within the European Union. I said to my honourable

friend that in terms of dealing with issues of migration, it is important

that we take steps outside of Europe, where the majority of net

migration comes from, as well as inside Europe, so that is the

approach we look at. I will certainly reflect on the further

representations that are made to be. I would like to express my heartfelt

sympathy to the Brain family who came here in good faith and have

been let down by the government. There case is yet another that

highlights the chaos of the immigration system under this

government. The Brains situation will be familiar to many members in

this House who have faced constituents facing deportation due

to changes to immigration rules. This is a family who came to the UK

on a government scheme specifically designed to attract people to

relocate here. They entered illegally, they have integrated into

their community and have fully embraced its way of life. That they

should now be faced with a petition due to government changes shows the

problem caused by the constant chopping and changing of the

immigration rules by the Home Office. These changes are

retrospectively made in a desperate attempt to meet targets on net

migration that the government has consistently missed and shows no

signs of meeting at any time soon. It just adds insult to injury. The

Highlands of Scotland have faced a problem of the precision

percentages. -- deportation. Is the right honourable member for Moray

said yesterday, it is not a case of immigration but of emigration. The

immigration system must face the needs of our communities, not

focusing just on an arbitrary number from Whitehall. It is important

rules are enforced, but this is also an issue of compassion. Should we be

uprooting a young family who came to the UK legally and in good faith

from lights they have built here? Should we be deporting children

whose whole lives have been here to a country they barely know? Why do

the brain family -- to family not qualify under the original terms? I

understand he has extended the application process, but given that

these terms were changed by the government, what support has been

provided to assist the family? Why is the Home Office making this an

issue of immigration rather than emigration? The help provided has

been the discretion that has already been applied in relation to this

case, not once, but twice in allowing extra time for the family

to make their stay regular. So it is incorrect to suggest we have taken a

blinkered approach or to have simply applied a very strict approach that

she has criticised. In relation to the Post study work, it is important

that the House understands that the reason we made these changes was not

to simply target some simple number, it was rather to deal with abuse in

the system, that this government inherited from the last Labour

government. On the fact we had students arriving in this country

that could not speak English, using this as a mechanism not to study but

to work. But we have shown that we are prepared to listen in respect of

this case. We have already taken representations from the honourable

member whose constituency represents in continuing to reflect on this,

and as I have indicated, that is what we will do, but I would say

that we will make the point that the family have known for at least five

years of what the requirements would be, the need to get a graduate-level

job, and we do wish them success in securing that, and I look forward to

hearing further representations regarding this. This case highlights

the fact that Scotland's migration needs are different from the south

of England's. I would like to assure the Minister that the Scottish party

government in Edinburgh has created an enterprising economy. We need the

government to do its bit in bringing in a policy that will enable

Scotland to attract and keep the talent we need, particularly in

areas like the Highlands. When will this government recognise that

Scotland's migration needs are different, and in particular will he

tell me when his government are going to reintroduce the Post study

work Visa, bearing in mind that all parties in the Scottish Parliament

support that, including Ruth Davidson's party.

Our immigration policy is formed on the basis of the whole of the UK and

the needs of the UK, in attracting skilled and talented people to come

to the United Kingdom to contribute to our continued economic growth

which is what I have underlined to other honourable members in the

answers I have given. We do recognise within, for example, the

shortage of skills, the fact there is a separate shortage occupation

list on prioritising the visas that are given to people coming to work

within the United Kingdom, reflecting that is the case. The

reason that we did take the step we did an relation to post study work

was because of the abuse we saw and also, some have referred to the

fresh talent scheme and the information from the Scottish

Government social research in 2008 indicated only 44% of that actually

remained in Scotland at the end of their two years leave under the

scheme and many people have come to London and the South East rather

than staying in Scotland. We have heard a great deal about the fresh

talent scheme so does he agree with me that the fresh talent scheme that

was run under the last Labour Government was flawed and did not

lead to skilled migrants settling in Scotland? That has nothing to do

with Government policy now, the particular case of which we are

treating. We have to have things dealt with in an orderly way. The

brain family enjoy support throughout the Highlands and I have

had many similar cases over my years as a member of Parliament. The

Minister says we have to have a system that works for the whole of

the United Kingdom and he is absolutely right but the truth of

the matter is that the current system does not work for communities

like those in the Highlands and it doesn't work for communities in the

rural north-west of England, Cornwall or mid Wales. Will he look

again at the way the rules operate and understand the immigration needs

of Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow are very different to those of the

Highlands and islands which again are different to those in other

regions of England and Wales. I think the point he makes is one I

know that a number of honourable numbers have made this morning and I

have indicated there is recognition within the immigration rules that I

think do recognise that. Some have said, should there be separate

salary threshold is the different parts of the United Kingdom? I would

say, be careful what you wish for because on the median level

salaries, that might lead to an increase in the salary threshold for

Scotland, contrasting to where the national salary limits sit at the

present time. I have been very clear on the fact we have listened

carefully in relation to the specific case and certainly, I will

continue to do so. The Home Affairs Select Committee, the Business

Select Committee and other members of this House have warned the

Government the post study work walls just don't work. They result in the

kind of mess we have this morning. He talks about abuse but the only

evidence that has been given by a previous immigration in Minister,

was one found at the checkout in Tesco who was working instead of

being a student. If there is abuse, deal with it but don't let it affect

genuine people who want to come to this country. The Minister says he

has exercised his discretion twice. I am glad he has discovered

discretion which is something he has not used in the past on a large

number of cases, especially mine! I say to him, he should exercise it

once more and allow this family to stay. He highlights the issue of

abuse we saw under the previous student arrangements and I would

point to the fact that now, 920 responses under the previous student

arrangements have had their sponsorship withdrawn as part of the

reforms that I think have ensured that we do have a quality that we

want. We do want to attract skilled and talented people to come and

study at our universities and I would highlight the fact that the

Russell group universities have seen a 7% increase in the number of

international students coming to study at their institutions. I think

I have underlined this morning that I have considered this case

carefully and discretion I have exercised, and I will continue to

listen to the representations made and I will always consider them,

made by all honourable members across this House. It is important

discretion is exercised exceptionally otherwise we undermine

the rules themselves. We silly I have had a substantial increase in

the number of people telling me immigration lawyers would take their

case. It appears to be a result of change in procedure meaning little

chance of success. Why won't the Government take the opportunity

afforded by the family to reassess its immigration rules and procedures

and introduced that moment of compassion as well as helping those

who benefit our economy to stay in the UK. We always keep our

immigration rules under review and as I have again indicated this

morning, we are always prepared to look at cases that may be brought to

us and examine them to make sure they are assessed properly. It is

important we have clarity within those rules because if you seek to

exercise discretion all the time, then it starts to undermine the very

rules you are seeking to uphold. A week before the Scottish referendum,

the PM said if Scotland wanted to stay in the UK,... All possible.

The Scottish Parliament wants to keep just one family in a Highlands

and it seems nothing at all is possible.

Can I ask you one question, have you identified a school in Australia

where the little boy can continue his education? We continue to

discuss with the Scottish Government on matters relating to the

possibility of examining these issues on reform to international

higher education students. I think the UK does have an excellent record

in post study offer available to graduates students. I will continue

to listen to the representations made connection to this case.

Instead of spending time and resources on the deportation of this

family, should the Home Office not get its actions right and ensure

dangerous criminals are deported after their first offence rather

than waiting for them to offend again? This Government does take the

removal of foreign national offenders and those who oppose a

threat to this country very seriously. The honourable gentleman

will see from our figures released today that the numbers are at about

a five year high. We continue to work across governments to achieve

more and I will reflect on the specific case he has referred to. I

congratulate my honourable friend on his urgent question and indeed the

workers for Gordon and Murray and our colleagues in the Scottish

Parliament for the attention they are giving to this case. The

Minister has made clear this is a direct result of changes in those,

while people are in the country, that this family find themselves in

this position. It is a continuing lack of attention and understanding

that this Government has immigration. It is time for this

ministers to stand up and do the right thing and show that project

fear will not be allowed to win the day. This Government does recognise

the contribution that skilled and talented people from outside of this

country can make to our economy and I have already been very explicit in

the way in which our immigration rules are designed to achieve that.

I do say that we did announce the closure of the post study work

groups in 2011, before the family arrived but I will continue to

reflect on further representations made and consider those carefully

and indeed any further application the family may wish to make. Isn't

this case confirming UK immigration policy doesn't work for Scotland?

Scotland needs families like this, to come and live and work in

Scotland. Different population demographic challenges and we do not

share this Conservative Government's obsession with immigration figures.

Can he start a conversation with a about an immigration policy

throughout the UK so we can... Inaudible ... We have an immigration

policy that we continue to reform to make sure it acts in the best

interest of this country. I don't accept the characterisation that he

gives. We will continue to remain open to discussions with the

Scottish comment about a range of issues but we are clear on

attracting skilled and talented people and there are ways in which

people can move from education into work and it is important to have

that separation to avoid the abuse we saw in the past.

No Conservative supporters of his on the benches opposite are supporting

in anyway the decision which has been made by the Home Office. Would

it not be appropriate to understand the strength of feeling which has

been expressed on this side throughout the exchanges? It is

always important to recognise when the House of Commons feels very

angry and upset over the decision and I hope the Minister will bear

that in mind. The only decision that is outstanding from the Home Office

at this stage is the extension of time that we have given to the

family on two occasions to make a further application. To put that

application in on the basis of employment within Scotland or the

rest of the UK. I will of course continue to reflect on

representations made but that is precisely what I will be doing with

the meeting later today. This Government has gone back on its

word. We hear a lot from this Government about their thoughts on

one nation so can I ask the Minister, which nation does he think

is benefiting from this obtuse and retrospective immigration

arrangement? I reminded the honourable lady as to when the

decision was announced to close the post study work route which was in

March 2011 and when the family arrived. They have had many years to

know what the situation is and I wish them obviously success and I

will continue to reflect on representations.

The headshaking from the front bench, two people in the front

bench... Demonstrates the Government's attitude. In case of

immigration policy for the UK as a whole, is it not time to devise a

threshold, 35,000, that needs to be reviewed as well. No, that is a roar

that has been clearly set to show progression and therefore benefit to

the UK economy, whether in Scotland or elsewhere. We have provided

certain exemptions for that in relation to certain sectors that I

think it is a brawl that benefits the UK. -- is together rule that

benefits the UK. This family are desperate to contribute to the

Highlands. The Highlands are desperate to keep them. What gives

any one the moral right to make a decision on the Highlands that

nobody in the Highlands wants? The family ultimately need to find

employment at the appropriate level and I think that is why I have made

the points I have about the Scottish Government and the work it does to

see there is a strong economy that is creating jobs and that creates an

environment for people to stay and work in Scotland and that is the

important part of this. As an MP for a rural constituency, experiencing

depopulation, I am dismayed at this Government is preparing to throw out

Scotland, a family that has moved into the Highlands and are

contributing positively to their community. Why is this Government

determined to make a depopulation problem worse by sticking to this

unfair and unjust action. The rules are clearly out of date and

outmoded. The immediate prospect of the family being removed is not

there. We are open to any further application they wish to make and I

stress this point on the ability of the Scottish Government to create

jobs for people to stay. Point of order. As you know we had

the first ever topical questions session in the women are qualities

oral questions this morning. I want to say thanks to the Leader of the

House and the Minister for women and equality is for the support. We had

a few teething problems with the new arrangements which meant I wasn't