[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Windrush Debacle / EU Citizens Problems Come Brexit : When Used Up , Throw Away / Banish From The Realm ??? ??? - Page 3 - Carers UK Forum

Windrush Debacle / EU Citizens Problems Come Brexit : When Used Up , Throw Away / Banish From The Realm ??? ???

Please feel free to join in or start any games.
Windrush scandal : Sajid Javid apologises to woman wrongly denied help.

The home secretary has apologised to a 41-year-old woman who faced deportation and eviction after being wrongly refused help by the Windrush scheme.

Willow Sims, who moved to the UK from the US aged four, lost proof of her indefinite leave to remain when she was taken into foster care.

Sajid Javid said he was "concerned" by the mother-of-two's story.

Ms Sims said she hoped the Home Office would find a solution "so that nobody has to not exist ever again".

She worked as a teaching assistant until last year, when she was subjected to a routine DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) check by her employers.

Without the necessary documents, she was unable to prove her immigration status, and subsequently lost her right to work, and her access to healthcare and benefits.

She is now thousands of pounds in debt and reliant on food banks.

Any carer either with Caribbean born parents or grandparents care to add their thoughts to this thread ?

Over 40,000 describing themselves as carers in London alone ... 100,000+ nationwide ? ... Census 2011.
Home Office accused of " Aggravating " Windrush suffering after admitting only one person helped by hardship scheme.

Lawyers say people caught up in scandal have fallen into destitution due to " Shocking " delays.

Ministers have been accused of “aggravating” the suffering of Windrush citizens after admitting only one person has been helped by a hardship scheme set up for those affected.

In the government’s latest Windrush update, Sajid Javid said that of 16 people who had requested support under the special hardship fund, created in December, five had been declined, 10 were still under consideration and just one had been approved.

Lawyers warned that as a result of delays and difficulty receiving pay-outs, people who had been identified as having been wrongly targeted by immigration controls had fallen into destitution.

Yvette Cooper, chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said the fact that the fund had only helped one person was “shocking” and urged the home secretary to urgently review the operation of the scheme so that people are not “further let down”.

In one case, a woman who was brought back to the UK after being wrongly removed from the UK was told by the Home Office that she should go to a charity shop to get a fridge and a cooker.
Windrush generation will not lose benefits after government U-turn.

Claimants given compensation will still get support, documents show, but uncertainty remains.


The government is expected to introduce new regulations to prevent members of the Windrush generation losing out on the financial support they are entitled to in a benefits U-turn, it has been disclosed.

In response to the threat of legal action, officials have stated in internal documents that regulations will be introduced “in due course” to ensure those currently receiving means-tested benefits do not lose out on them if they get compensation payouts over the Home Office’s “hostile environment” rules.

However, despite the documents seen by the Guardian, no new regulations have yet been published, meaning continued uncertainty for those who might be affected.

Lawyers have expressed concern that people from the Windrush generation entitled to compensation because of their treatment by the Home Office could be “punished twice” under the current benefit rules and have called on the government to announce the changes publicly.

As the current rules stand, some could lose means-tested benefits payments if they benefit from the Windrush compensation scheme announced last month.

Solicitor Jane Ryan from Bhatt Murphy, who is representing several Windrush people, said: “Windrush claimants have already suffered as a consequence of the discriminatory hostile environment policies; they should not be placed in a worse position for seeking redress.

It is welcome that the Home Office has clarified its position but until the regulations are public there remains a risk that Windrush claimants supported by means-tested benefits will be unfairly treated. The government needs to publish the regulations as soon as possible.”

There are some parallels with the Grenfell compensation scheme where DWP came under pressure to allow survivors to continue to access benefits irrespective of payouts.
EU citizens in UK at risk of Windrush-style catastrophe, say MPs.

Home affairs select committee urges government to change rules of EU settlement scheme.

The government has been urged by MPs to urgently change its policy on EU citizens in the country if it is to avert a “Windrush-style catastrophe” in the years after Brexit.

Politicians on the influential home affairs select committee said they had serious concerns about the design of the settlement scheme for EU citizens, launched by the Home Office two months ago.

There are an estimated 3.8 million EU citizens in the UK and those who want to remain after Brexit are obliged to apply for settled status by June 2021 in the event of a deal or December 2020 in the event of no deal.

Committee members said the design of the scheme meant many EU citizens were at risk of forfeiting their rights to remain after the deadline. “The prospect of a Windrush-style catastrophe happening to over 3 million EU citizens who have made the UK their home in good faith is deeply troubling,” the committee said in a report, EU Settlement Scheme.

The report comes as new statistics show 750,000 people have applied for settled status since the scheme opened, among them 100,000 of the estimated 1 million Polish people in the UK.

The home secretary, Sajid Javid, said the numbers were “immensely encouraging”.

After an investigation and witnesses including Javid, the committee’s report concluded the only way to ensure EU citizens are guaranteed to retain their rights is to legislate.

“We therefore call on the government to protect in law the rights of EU citizens in the UK. The government should guarantee in law that any EU citizens living in the UK before Brexit are legal residents of the UK and are able to continue to live and work as they have done until now,” says the report.

The Labour MP Yvette Cooper, who chairs the committee, said: “The government’s current plans for the EU settlement scheme show they are not learning the lessons from the Windrush scandal.

“The problems faced by the Windrush generation showed how easily individuals can fall through gaps in the system through no fault of their own and how easily lives can be destroyed if the government gets this wrong.”

Stuart McDonald, the SNP member of the committee, said that under the scheme “too many people, including children and vulnerable individuals, risk falling through the gaps and not accessing the scheme at all … The warning signs are there, now the government must take action.”

He also said the government needed a printed document and not a digital system to enable EU citizens to deal with landlords, employers and officials at airports and ports.

“People also need hard copy documents, not just an unfamiliar digital system,” he said.

Echoing the criticisms of campaigners, the committee said EU citizens should not have to apply to remain but just have to declare they are in the country.

This would bring the approach into line with other EU countries, where people are merely required to notify a town hall of their arrival and their address.

“The government has chosen to implement a system which does not grant status to eligible people but requires them to apply for it and the home secretary told us that EU citizens are only entitled to the status which they are able to evidence.

“We disagree with this. We believe the EU citizens legally resident in the UK [before Brexit] should have their rights protected and their entitlement to remain enshrined in law,” says the report.

Witnesses told the report “there is another way forward” similar to the treatment of Commonwealth citizens who had their immigration status formalised in the 1970s.

As Colin Yeo, an immigration barrister, told them: “You just pass a law saying ‘You are lawful. We will sort out the difficulties later, as and when they arise.’”

The issue over the government approach to EU citizens came to the fore earlier this week when Michael Gove pledged to support calls by Tory backbencher Alberto Costa for a declaratory system. He has also offered free British citizenship to EU citizens.

Ministers faced a furious backlash over the treatment of the Windrush generation after it emerged long-term UK residents were denied access to cancer treatment and other services, held in detention or removed, despite living legally in the country for decades.

A Home Office spokesman said: “We disagree with the home affairs select committee’s assessment of the scheme, which is performing well with more than 600,000 applications received by the end of April and hundreds of thousands of people already being granted status.

“The scheme protects the rights of EU citizens in UK law and gives them a secure digital status which, unlike a physical document, cannot be lost, stolen or tampered with. A declaratory system – that means EU citizens are not required to obtain status and evidence of this – risks causing confusion especially for the most vulnerable, and could in years to come find people struggling to prove their status.

“We have taken great care to learn from the experience of the Windrush generation. It’s part of the reason why there are 200 assisted digital locations across the UK to help EU citizens apply, dedicated staff in our Settlement Resolution Centre and £9m available for 57 organisations across the UK to support an estimated 200,000 vulnerable people to apply.”
Home secretary apologises to more Windrush citizens – but campaigners warn many victims still suffering.

Sajid Javid says their treatment has been “ Completely unacceptable ” and promised compensation.

A snippet :

The home secretary has apologised to more Windrush victims as his department revealed that 6,400 people have been granted status under the dedicated scheme.

Fourteen months after the scandal erupted, Sajid Javid has sent apology letters to another 49 victims – taking the total number to 67 – saying their treatment has been “completely unacceptable” and that they would receive support and access to the compensation scheme.

But charities and immigration lawyers are worried that a large number of people affected have either not come forward due to a lack of support, are still waiting for decisions on their case due to delays, or have been wrongly refused under the scheme.

Figures published by the Home Office in its latest Windrush update show nearly one in five applications – or 457 out of 2,467 – have taken longer than the target two-week decision time, with lawyers telling of numerous cases which have taken more than six months and in one case a year.

There is also concern over the high proportion of overseas applications which have not been accepted, with new figures showing 649 out-of-country applications have been declined, while just 109 have been granted.
Oh dear , what a way to divert attention away all the recent wrongdoings !!!

( Why not site at a terminal at Heathrow ? Last thing many will see after being deported ??? )

Windrush memorial to be built at Waterloo station.

London's Waterloo Station is to house a monument to the Windrush generation, the prime minister has announced.

Theresa May said the monument would be seen by "millions of people from all around the world" every year.

The Windrush Commemoration Committee, set up by the government last year, will work with designers on the "next steps over the coming months".

Events are taking place across the country on Saturday to mark the first National Windrush Day.

Mrs May said: "This monument will be a lasting legacy to the tremendous contribution the Windrush generation and their children have made to our great country."

An article this morning from The Guardian :

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... mpensation

Windrush victim dies with no apology or compensation

Richard Stewart had hoped payment would fund trip to his mother’s grave in Jamaica

Read and judge for yourselves !!!


Beat The Guardian to it ... again !

May’s plan for Windrush memorial at Waterloo met with " Disgust. "

Windrush Foundation angry at lack of consultation with Caribbean community.

A memorial to the Windrush generation at Waterloo station in London is being “imposed” by the government to the “disgust” of the Caribbean community, the Windrush Foundation has said.

Announcing the plan for the permanent monument on Saturday, Theresa May said it would be a lasting legacy to the “tremendous contribution” of the Windrush generation as events were due to take place for the first Windrush Day to mark 71 years since arrival of HMT Empire Windrush.

However, Arthur Torrington, the chair of the Windrush Foundation, said the government was behaving “arrogantly” and “treating the Caribbean community like children” by not consulting with key groups, while he noted just 13 Windrush victims have so far been granted emergency support by the government.

“Its like imposing a monument on your behalf where you don’t want it and saying this is what you should have,” Torrington said.

“You can’t just bully a community and say, ‘Here is a monument’. This is the same arrogance that led to the Windrush scandal. In a sense they’re looking for another one by treating the Caribbean community like children.”

He said that the community wanted it to be in Brixton, in Windrush Square, and that Waterloo station had “nothing to do” with Windrush.

“Windrush is about 1948,” he said. “We don’t understand why the government can’t consult more. This monument is being imposed to our disgust.”

Karen Doyle, the national organiser of Windrush pressure group Movement for Justice, said that memorialising the arrival and contribution of the Windrush generation was important and welcome, but “ripping up the hostile environment polices would be a fitting monument”.

“[A] gesture in bronze and steel feels empty and meaningless from a government that championed the hostile environment bringing destitution, detention, deportation, exile and death to this important generation,” she said. “It is particularly galling when there are still so many who live in fear of detention and deportation, the descendants and family members who are currently excluded from help by this government.

“The money would be better spent tackling the racist core of British immigration law, which bequeathed a permanently impermanent second class citizenship on the Windrush generation.”

The memorial announcement comes a week after another prominent Windrush victim, former Middlesex cricketer Richard Stewart, died without receiving compensation or a personal apology from the government.

About 500 migrants from the Caribbean arrived at Tilbury Docks in Essex on 22 June 1948 aboard the MV Empire Windrush, at the invitation of the British government, to help rebuild the UK in the aftermath of the second world war.

“The Windrush generation helped lay the foundations for the country we know today, which is richer and stronger as a result of their hard work and dedication to the UK,” May said.

“This monument will be a lasting legacy to the tremendous contribution the Windrush generation and their children have made to our great country.”

Ministers and the Home Office came under fire after it was revealed members of the Windrush generation and their children had been wrongly detained and deported – and others denied access to healthcare, work, housing benefits and pensions.

Amber Rudd was forced to step down as home secretary after a series of revelations in the Guardian over the Windrush scandal culminated in a leak that appeared to show she was aware of targets for removing illegal migrants from Britain.

On Saturday, the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said “the disgraceful way” the Windrush generation and their families have been treated by the government was “a national scandal”.

He pledged to invest up to £370,000 to help Londoners access legal support to secure their immigration status, saying “the increasing severity of the hostile environment is putting Londoners with the right to be here at risk of destitution.”

May’s plan was roundly condemned by Labour politicians, as well as members of the public. Shadow minister for women and equalities, Dawn Butler, tweeted:

(((Dawn Butler MP))) (@DawnButlerBrent)

This video is an insult from the person who created the hostile environment that deported Black British citizens. We don’t need May’s empty rhetoric. We need justice & compensation We need May to resolve ALL outstanding cases & end the racist hostile environment now. #WindrushDay https://t.co/2tLUK5GNr6
June 22, 2019

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn tweeted: “The Windrush scandal goes on with tragic consequences. The Windrush Generation need justice and compensation. The Tories’ “hostile environment” must end to ensure that this can never happen again.”

Following the scandal, May established the Windrush Commemoration Committee to consider how best to create a permanent, fitting tribute to the Windrush generation and their descendants.

The committee’s chairwoman, Lady Floella Benjamin, said: “Having a Windrush monument located at Waterloo station where thousands of Windrush pioneers – including children like myself – first arrived in London, will be a symbolic link to our past as we celebrate our future.

“The committee is determined to build a monument of great beauty and emotional impact which will lift the hearts of those who visit when it’s unveiled. I hope it will inspire pride and a sense of belonging to all those associated with the Windrush story.”
The Unwanted : The Secret Windrush Files review – who could feel proud of Britain after this ?

Theresa May’s hostile environment was a full 70 years in the making, argues this damning, devastating documentary.

As the Empire Windrush made its way from the Caribbean to Britain in 1948, politicians in Westminster were frantically scheming about how they could prevent a ship carrying hundreds of black immigrants from docking in the UK. The Labour prime minister Clement Attlee described it as an “incursion”.

A meeting of the government’s economic policy committee discussed whether it might be possible to divert the ship to east Africa, and make its passengers (a well-qualified group of electricians, mechanics, welders and carpenters) take work there, picking peanuts. Eleven Labour MPs delivered a letter to Attlee warning that “an influx of coloured people” would “impair the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life and cause discord and unhappiness among all concerned”.

Anyone who thought that the introduction of the hostile environment was one of Theresa May’s few clear, tangible accomplishments will need to reconsider. It turns out that even this unpleasant creation is not something she can claim as her core legacy, since it had already been 70 years in the making.

Although the postwar government estimated Britain needed 1.3 million extra workers to help rebuild a country shattered by five years of war, officials turned out to be more welcoming to ex-SS soldiers from Germany than British subjects from the Caribbean.

In his powerful film, The Unwanted: the Secret Windrush Files (BBC Two), the historian David Olusoga manages to explain complex immigration law and decode dense documents from the government archives in an arresting way. He pulls out devastating passages from forgotten files to showcase the hostility of successive governments to non-white settlers.

Everything begins with the British Nationality Act of 1948, which confirmed the right of all British subjects to move freely and live anywhere they liked within the newly created Commonwealth.

But the act, Olusoga argues, was intended to ensure frictionless travel for the large white populations of Canada and Australia. “No one imagined that black and brown people from Asia, Africa and the West Indies would use their rights under this act to come and settle in Britain.”

Incriminating archival material reveals the scale of official panic about immigration and the underhand measures taken to discourage residents of Britain’s colonies from settling. Crucially, politicians wanted to restrict access without actually appearing to be racist. The film exposes their shameful contortions as they scrabbled around to justify their prejudices.

We learn how ministers in the 1950s commissioned researchers to come up with reasons for concluding that non-white immigration was problematic, with senior civil servants instructing dole officers to conduct secret race surveys to see if there was any truth in the assumption that migrants were coming to live off the welfare state, and asking police chiefs around the country leading questions such as: “Is it true that they are generally idle?”, “Do they have low standards of living?”, and “Are they addicted to drug trafficking and other types of crime?”

Winston Churchill was obsessed by the “considerable” number of “coloured workers” employed by the Post Office, and, by 1955, was suggesting to ministers that they should fight the next election on the slogan “Keep England White”.

This gradual tightening of immigration legislation exploded in the hands of Theresa May’s government last April, with the Windrush scandal – when thousands of Caribbean-born citizens, legally settled here since childhood, found that they had been silently transformed into illegal immigrants, and threatened with deportation, detained, sacked from their jobs or made homeless.

Olusoga shows how the roots of the scandal lie in a single line from the 1971 Immigration Act, which put the onus on individuals to prove that they are here legally – something so many people were unable to do, with devastating consequences. “Who keeps receipts from the 1970s?”

Anthony Bryan asks, explaining how he was detained for five weeks and booked on a flight back to Jamaica. A letter from the Home Office to his lawyer demands more proof: “Your client has stated that he has been resident in the UK since 1965. As such, the evidence submitted must be continuous, and cover the entirety of the 51 years that your client has claimed to reside in the UK.”

The most moving parts of this film are the interviews with three Windrush victims (all of whom helped expose the scandal in the Guardian). “It was a country I was proud of, but now I don’t think I feel proud of it,” Sarah O’Connor says, after being wrongly classified as an illegal immigrant, despite her 51 years in the UK. “At times I got so low I wanted my life to end.” Sarah died before the film was finished. No one could feel proud of Britain after watching it.
Home Office Windrush report damns hostile environment policy.

Review says policy failed to take account of racial discrimination and accuses officials of recklessness.

The Home Office failed in its legal duty to counter racial discrimination when it implemented its anti-immigration hostile environment programme, a draft investigation into the causes of the Windrush scandal, commissioned by the department itself, has reportedly found.

The damning document accuses officials of recklessness and a reluctance to acknowledge and learn from their mistakes, according to Channel 4 News, which was shown a leaked version of the review.

The extracts of the draft report by Wendy Williams, an inspector of constabulary, highlights the Home Office’s failure to admit it was wrong and to issue an unqualified apology. Williams was commissioned to undertake the “Windrush lessons learned” review by the home secretary, Sajid Javid, last summer in the wake of reporting on the scandal by the Guardian.

“While everyone I spoke to was rightly appalled by what happened, this was often juxtaposed with a self-justification, either in the form of it was unforeseen, unforeseeable and therefore unavoidable ... or a failure on the part of individuals to prove their status,” Williams wrote, in extracts seen by Channel 4 News.

Theresa May introduced a series of hostile environment policies, under which she sought to make life intolerable for people who had illegally entered the UK, in a bid to cut inward immigration numbers during her time as home secretary. Williams’s review focuses on the impact of immigration laws from that period. As a result of this legislation, thousands of people who had been living legally in the UK for decades found themselves wrongly classified as illegal immigrants. Many lost their jobs, were made homeless or denied healthcare and some were detained and deported to countries they had left as children.

Judy Griffith, 64, who arrived in the UK from Barbados in 1963 when she was nine and who has worked and paid taxes here for decades, was informed she was an illegal immigrant by Jobcentre officials two years ago. She was unable to work and ineligible for benefits, remains in debt and and has had no compensation or personal apology. She said she was unsurprised by the report’s findings. “The policies were insidious, deliberate, nasty and racist,” she said. “There’s been no proper apology. When you look at the compensation scheme it makes you think they are in no way sorry.”

Draft extracts of Williams’ review suggest the implementation of May’s policies was flawed because “it failed to adequately consider the past ... It failed to adequately consider the impact on people ... It also failed to adequately mitigate equalities issues including the potential for discrimination, particularly in housing”.

The document reportedly adds that the Home Office failed to effectively evaluate the effectiveness of its policies. “This appears particularly reckless considering the significant warnings that the department was given about their potential consequences.”

The shadow women and equalities secretary, Dawn Butler, said the report was “extremely damning” and that the legislation that established the hostile environment was “deliberately discriminatory and racist towards people that were invited to this country and were British citizens”.

Her Labour colleague, David Lammy, who has been a vocal campaigner on the issue, demanded that the government scrap the hostile environment policy and said it would be May’s lasting legacy.

Williams also describes a “defensive culture that results in an unwillingness to learn from past mistakes” within the Home Office. She reportedly recommends that the department’s staff be educated in the UK’s colonial past and proposes that government ministers should admit that they were wrong and provide an unqualified apology.

“Ministers/department should admit that it was wrong and provide an unqualified apology...the sincerity of this apology will be judged by how far the department demonstrates contrition.”

Satbir Singh, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This review confirms what we at JCWI have said from the beginning: Windrush was no accident, but the inevitable result of a broken immigration system, driven by the divisive politics of scapegoating and scaremongering.

“After today, there is nowhere left to hide. The Tory leadership candidates must pledge to scrap the hostile environment, repeal right to rent [which demands landlords check tenants’ immigration status] and rebuild the immigration system from the ground up. We expect the government to release the full report without delay so that we can begin finally to build a humane, fair and functional immigration system.”

A Home Office spokesman said: “We do not comment on leaked documents.”
Windrush victims still waiting for payments from Home Office.

Brexit blamed for delay as Sajid Javid says compensation will now be fast-tracked.

The government has still made no compensation payments to Windrush victims and has failed to introduce legislation that would allow damages to be paid, 15 months after Theresa May apologised for the scandal and promised a financial settlement.

The compensation scheme that was announced in April requires legislation before payments can be made; however, the Home Office revealed yesterday that the pressures of Brexit have meant it has not been possible so far to find parliamentary time for the legislation to be debated. Instead the Home Office has announced a temporary fix, which will now allow compensation to be paid, in the absence of legislation.

People waiting for compensation responded with frustration to the revelation that the government has only now made arrangements to make the payment of damages possible. Janet Mckay, whose partner Anthony Bryan spent five weeks in detention and was booked by the Home Office in 2017 on to a plane back to Jamaica (a country he left at the age of eight, and had not visited in 52 years), said it was “strange” to discover that the government had not previously made arrangements to facilitate the payment of compensation.

“Everyone is struggling to fill in the forms. I had no idea they weren’t ready to pay out as soon as the forms were sent in,” she said.

Labour MP David Lammy said the new evidence of delays was staggering. “I welcome the announcement that compensation payments will now be paid to the victims of the Windrush scandal – at least to those who are still alive.

However, this also reveals that no such payments have been made thus far, which is deeply yet predictably disappointing,” he said. “It is also staggering that the Home Office is yet to establish any legislative framework for these claims to be processed; it is hard to fathom just how badly the Home Office continues to let down the Windrush generation.”

Omar Khan, director of the Runnymede Trust, the race equality thinktank, said he was shocked that this issue had only now been resolved. “It’s not good enough to commit in principle to compensation if you don’t put in place the levers required to get money into people’s pockets. They’ve had months to get it right. It raises questions about how urgently and seriously the government is responding to this injustice,” he said.

Charities assisting victims to claim compensation say that people are increasingly frustrated at the protracted process. Daniel Ashwell at the Refugee and Migrant Centre in Wolverhampton, which is helping around 10 people to claim damages, said: “The most frustrating thing is that people are still waiting. We see the pressure that this is putting on them; they constantly have this on their minds – wondering when they are going to get compensation. Some of them are very vulnerable.”

The permanent secretary to the Home Office, Sir Philip Rutnam, informed the home secretary, Sajid Javid, that he would ordinarily advise against making payments from the Windrush compensation scheme until specific legislation has been passed.

However, given the “importance of putting right wrongs that have been done”, he identified an interim solution, allowing the Home Office to get around the absence of legislation. Javid has subsequently issued a ministerial direction to proceed, which means that the Home Office is now in a position to start making payments.

In a ministerial statement, Javid announced: “The government deeply regrets what has happened to some members of the Windrush generation and when I became home secretary I made clear that responding to this was a priority. The compensation scheme I launched in April is a key part of this response.

The compensation scheme has been open to receive claims since April 2019 and the Home Office is now in a position to start making payments.” He said specific legislation giving financial authority for payments made would be introduced when parliamentary time allows.

“I am committed to providing members of the Windrush generation with assurance that they will be appropriately and promptly compensated where it is shown that they have been disadvantaged by historical government policy,” he wrote.