Immigration Matters
by Charles Kelly
Immigration Adviser &
Co-Author of the book
HOW 2 Come to the UK
to
live, work, study or visit
Welcome to Immigration Matters April
2005. In this month’s edition:
·
· Current Home Office Service Levels
· Higher Charges Announced by Home Office
· BBC Reports: Sir Mark Thatcher refused a
|
Daily Mail reports new investigation
into David Blunkett ‘Fast Tracking’ of visa Revealed: Nanny got visa in 19 days David Blunkett (pictured above with Kimberly Quinn) faces new
questions today with the revelation that an application for Kimberly Quinn has accused the
Home Secretary of 'fast tracking' the visa application and he admits taking
papers on her case to his office to be inspected by two senior civil
servants. |
|
|
David Blunkett
& Kimberly Quinn |
He has categorically denied intervening in any way or
putting pressure on officials processing the application.
The nanny, Leoncia
'Luz' Casalme, was at first informed by the Home
Office that the application could take up to a year to process. Yet the visa
guaranteeing her permanent residency was approved and her passport stamped just
19 days later.
The fallout from the three-year affair between Mr Blunkett and Mrs Quinn has become increasingly bitter as he fights for
access to her two-year-old son William - who is believed to be the Home
Secretary's child - and the baby she is expecting in early February. With Mrs Quinn's damaging claim that Mr
Blunkett abused his ministerial office to help rush
through the visa, this new disclosure heaps fresh pressure on the beleaguered
minister.
Home Office documents seen by the Mail will form a pivotal
part of the inquiry by former Treasury adviser Sir Alan Budd into the
potentially damning claims. For they appear to raise serious questions about
the version of events supplied by Mr Blunkett's officials when the political storm broke at the
weekend.
The nanny, who arrived from
Covering
letter
The four-year rule would have meant that she was entitled to
residency in July 2003, but in fact it was approved more than ten weeks before
this time elapsed.
Sources close to the Quinn family said that in April 2003
Miss Casalme downloaded an application form from the
Home Office website and, after completing it, showed it to her employer. Mr Blunkett's lover then provided
a covering letter confirming that the nanny was still employed to look after
William.
Both documents - and the nanny's
Weeks later, officials in the Home Office's Integrated
Casework Directorate dispatched a reply, dated April 23, informing her that the
application 'has been accepted as valid'. The letter warned that 'because of
the high intake of applications and backlog of work' there would be a lengthy
delay. It continued: 'The waiting period for these cases is about 12 months at
the moment. We are doing all we can to reduce it and on current performance we
estimate that your application will be decided by January 2004.'
Friends of Mrs Quinn say she had
wanted the nanny to accompany her, her husband Stephen and William on a holiday
to
It
is understood that the nanny handed the letter to Mrs
Quinn who apparently kept it for the next 24 hours before handing it back to
her. It is not known what she did with the letter but it was revealed this week
that Mrs Quinn told a friend in an e-mail that 'David
(Blunkett) fast-tracked' it.
In
less than three weeks, Miss Casalme had received her
passport and visa. A two-page letter from the Home Office to the nanny, dated
May 12 and signed by O Osifodunrin, said: 'I am
writing to say that there are no longer any restrictions on the period for
which you may remain in the
In
bold type, it proclaimed: ‘You can now remain
indefinitely in the
Raft of other claims
What
Sir Alan Budd will now want to know is what, if any, part the Home Secretary
played in the extraordinary about-turn by immigration officials over the length
of time it would take.
Although
the nanny's visa application is the only allegation being investigated, Mr Blunkett faced a raft of other
claims at the weekend. They included the misuse of civil servants at a meeting
with his lover, claims that 'pillow talk' led him to share confidential
security information with her, giving his lover two first-class rail tickets,
and using government transport to drive her to his Derbyshire home.
According
to friends of 44-year-old Mrs Quinn, who was
yesterday in hospital said to be suffering from stress, she told them that Mr Blunkett's assistance with the
visa application occurred in the 'spring of 2003'.
Confronted
with Mrs Quinn's allegations at the weekend, the Home
Secretary's office first said: ‘Kimberly asked David Blunkett
for his advice on whether the application was in good order. He said it was. It
did not go through his office and she (Miss Casalme)
submitted it herself.’
They
later amended their explanation to: ‘Kimberly's nanny was about to apply for
some sort of leave to remain in
‘David
took it with him to the Home Office and said to his principal private secretary
(Jonathan Sedgwick) and his deputy (Gareth Redmond), 'I have got a piece of
paper in my pocket, what does it say?' One of them may well have read it to him
and looked it over. There is nothing unusual in this.’
Controversy
Mr Blunkett's advisers differ on what happened to the
application next. One said that the Home Secretary 'put it into the system'
himself. But, shortly afterwards, a senior figure corrected that version,
saying he ‘gave it back to Kimberly and she then applied and it was processed
by the Immigration Service in the normal way. The allegation that he
fast-tracked the application is untrue.’
Last
night Miss Casalme declined to comment. Now working
for another family, she is fully entitled to be in
Chris
Randall,
Asked
if he thought there had been some irregularity, he said: 'Certainly it is
unusual.'
Two
leading immigration lawyers said it did appear that the visa had been issued
many weeks earlier than normal. They said some limited discretion was built
into the system. But, tellingly, that can be exercised only by Ministers and
very senior civil servants. A senior spokesman for the Home Secretary refused
to comment on the revelations.
‘I
think I have to say that Sir Alan Budd is going to be conducting an inquiry and
no doubt he will interview everyone he deems fit to be interviewed,’ said the
spokesman. ‘He will do a full and detailed job and I think it is right to leave
it all to him.’
Meanwhile the rest us have to put
up with increasing delays and higher charges.
The Home Office reports their
current service levels:
Work
Permits and SBS:
Service standard: 70% of applications to be decided within one week of
receipt at WP(
Current performance: During February, 75% of new applications were decided
within a week and 91% within 3 weeks. If we need to make further checks or seek
additional information, your application is more likely to fall into the
category that can take up to 3 weeks or even longer.
Limited
Leave to Remain
Service standard:
70% of applications to be decided within 3 weeks of receipt in WP(
Current performance: During February, 60% of new applications were decided within
3 weeks and 72% within 8 weeks. If we need to make further checks or seek
additional information, your application is more likely to fall into the category
that can take up to 8 weeks or even longer.
We are also working through a backlog of older
cases as quickly as possible. The oldest applications now being processed were
made in the week commencing
My own
experience suggests that some applications for Further Leaver to Remain have
actually taken up to five months, leaving many applicants in ‘limbo’ unable to
work or travel.
Higher Charges – Home Office
Announcement
As predicted in our article last year,
the Home Office have again increased charges on Leave to Remain Applications,
HSMP and PEO service in Croydon.
Leave to Remain Applications have risen to £335.00 (more than double the previous fee) and the premium service to £500. HSMP applications rise to £315. Fortunately, Work Permit fees remain unchanged for the time being.
The higher charges will affect thousands of Filipino Nurses
and Senior Carers renewing their Work Permits or changing jobs.
For further details, contact Overseas Consultancy Services
Sir Mark Thatcher
On a
lighter note, even sons of former Prime Ministers occasionally have problems
obtaining visas!
|
Sir Mark had been hoping to live in the US |
‘As
a result of this decision, I shall make the family home in and my family will be joining me as soon as arrangements are made.’ Sir Mark
Thatcher |
The BBC reports: ‘Sir Mark Thatcher refused
Sir Mark Thatcher has been
refused a visa to enter the
The son of the former
Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher had hoped to be reunited with his family in
But he said on Sunday: ‘I
shall make the family home in
Sir Mark, 51, was given a
four-year suspended sentence in January. He was also fined by a South African
court for offences related to the bungled coup attempt in
Sir Mark, who had lived
in
He had hoped to move to
But he said in a
statement: ‘It is quite true that my visa application has been rejected. It was
always a calculated risk when I plea bargained in
A spokesman for Sir Mark
said he could re-apply for a