CommentPlus: pick of the comment

The ten must-read pieces from this morning’s papers.

1. Why did Brown make this blunder? (Independent)

Gordon Brown's poor understanding of television, and his capacity to get explosively angry even when he has no need to be, meant all the ingredients for yesterday's nightmare were in place, says Steve Richards.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

2. If Brown's gaffe locks Labour in third, all progressives lose (Guardian)

There is no chance of a progressive revival if Labour finishes third in the popular vote, warns Seumas Milne. Unless the party's vote improves in the hundred-odd Labour-Tory marginals that will decide the election, Cleggmania will hand David Cameron the keys to No 10.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

3. Two questions the leaders must answer tonight (Times)

The party leaders should be asked whether their deficit reduction plans will remain so reliant on public spending cuts, says Robert Chote of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. History suggests that the next government may need to rely more on tax increases and cuts in the welfare budget.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

4. The truth is out about Gordon Brown, but what about the other two? (Daily Telegraph)

We may have heard what Gordon Brown really thinks for once, says Benedict Brogan, but the Tories, champions of openness in politics, are concealing plenty of inconvenient truths of their own.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

5. Time to rein in the rating agencies (Financial Times)

If the financial crisis proves anything, it is that ratings agencies enjoy too much authority, says John Gapper. Any reform that would loosen their grip on the bond markets deserves a shot.

6. Our Clegg-backing letter is one for the grandchildren (Guardian)

Future generations will not forgive us if we do not support the Lib Dems and the potential birth of a new democracy, says Richard Reeves.

7. Some politicians are still more equal than others (Independent)

The near-complete invisibility of women in this year's election campaign suggests that we have gone backwards in the long struggle for equality, writes Andrew Grice.

8. Greece is the word (Times)

The crisis in the Greek economy threatens to spread financial contagion and return Britain to recession, says a leader in the Times. A bailout is now the only acceptable option.

9. Crisis-hit Greece may be the first domino (Guardian)

Warming to the same theme, Larry Elliott warns that though the pound may help, Britain is not immune to this crisis.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

10. Gordon Brown's "bigot" gaffe shows Alistair Darling's superiority (Daily Telegraph)

Darling's impressive performance throughout the campaign marks him out as a potential Labour leader, says Alan Cochrane.

Sign up now to CommentPlus for the pick of the day's opinion, comment and analysis in your inbox at 8am, every weekday.

Paul McMillan
Show Hide image

"We're an easy target": how a Tory manifesto pledge will tear families apart

Under current rules, bringing your foreign spouse to the UK is a luxury reserved for those earning £18,600 a year or more. The Tories want to make it even more exclusive. 

Carolyn Matthew met her partner, George, in South Africa sixteen years ago. She settled down with him, had kids, and lived like a normal family until last year, when they made the fateful decision to move to her hometown in Scotland. Matthew, 55, had elderly parents, and after 30 years away from home she wanted to be close to them. 

But Carolyn nor George - despite consulting a South African immigration lawyer – did not anticipate one huge stumbling block. That is the rule, introduced in 2012, that a British citizen must earn £18,600 a year before a foreign spouse may join them in the UK. 

“It is very dispiriting,” Carolyn said to me on the telephone from Bo’ness, a small town on the Firth of Forth, near Falkirk. “In two weeks, George has got to go back to South Africa.” Carolyn, who worked in corporate complaints, has struggled to find the same kind of work in her hometown. Jobs at the biggest local employer tend to be minimum wage. George, on the other hand, is an engineer – yet cannot work because of his holiday visa. 

To its critics, the minimum income threshold seems nonsensical. It splits up families – including children from parents – and discriminates against those likely to earn lower wages, such as women, ethnic minorities and anyone living outside London and the South East. The Migration Observatory has calculated that roughly half Britain’s working population would not meet the requirement. 

Yet the Conservative party not only wishes to maintain the policy, but hike the threshold. The manifesto stated:  “We will increase the earnings thresholds for people wishing to sponsor migrants for family visas.” 

Initially, the threshold was justified as a means of preventing foreign spouses from relying on the state. But tellingly, the Tory manifesto pledge comes under the heading of “Controlling Immigration”. 

Carolyn points out that because George cannot work while he is visiting her, she must support the two of them for months at a time without turning to state aid. “I don’t claim benefits,” she told me. “That is the last thing I want to do.” If both of them could work “life would be easy”. She believes that if the minimum income threshold is raised any further "it is going to make it a nightmare for everyone".

Stuart McDonald, the SNP MP for Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East, co-sponsored a Westminster Hall debate on the subject earlier this year. While the Tory manifesto pledge is vague, McDonald warns that one option is the highest income threshold suggested in 2012 - £25,700, or more than the median yearly wage in the East Midlands. 

He described the current scheme as “just about the most draconian family visa rules in the world”, and believes a hike could affect more than half of British citizens. 

"Theresa May is forcing people to choose between their families and their homes in the UK - a choice which most people will think utterly unfair and unacceptable,” he said.  

For those a pay rise away from the current threshold, a hike will be demoralising. For Paul McMillan, 25, it is a sign that it’s time to emigrate.

McMillan, a graduate, met his American girlfriend Megan while travelling in 2012 (the couple are pictured above). He could find a job that will allow him to meet the minimum income threshold – if he were not now studying for a medical degree.  Like Matthew, McMillan’s partner has no intention of claiming benefits – in fact, he expects her visa would specifically ban her from doing so. 

Fed up with the hostile attitude to immigrants, and confident of his options elsewhere, McMillan is already planning a career abroad. “I am going to take off in four years,” he told me. 

As for why the Tories want to raise the minimum income threshold, he thinks it’s obvious – to force down immigration numbers. “None of this is about the amount of money we need to earn,” he said. “We’re an easy target for the government.”

Julia Rampen is the digital news editor of the New Statesman (previously editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog). She has also been deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines. 

0800 7318496