
Migrant health and care workers deserve better than this
John Harris's article mentions the March 2024 rules banning new migrant care workers from bringing dependants (In an NHS ward I saw how Britain relies on immigrants. Yet still we tell them they're not wanted, 16 February).
Less well known is that thousands of health and care workers who arrived before this date have also been prevented from bringing their children – most of them single mothers. A report published on 22 January by Action for Southern Africa and Women of Zimbabwe revealed that thousands of single mothers, from Zimbabwe and elsewhere, settled into their jobs only to then be denied visas for their children, who were waiting back home to join them.
These mothers – looking after our loved ones every day – have been separated from their children for years now, making multiple costly visa applications (some exploited by unscrupulous legal advisers in the process), because of Home Office refusals based on their concept of 'sole responsibility'. This is a concept created by the UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) which is incredibly hard for single mothers to prove, as it extends further than the internationally recognised notion of 'sole custody'.
Our report reveals lack of clarity about what documents the UKVI will accept as proof, inconsistent application of its own guidelines, and evidence of so-called hostile environment tactics to cause delays in decision-making.
The impact is devastating on everyone. One mother from Zimbabwe was separated from her two girls for almost two years. It took six applications before she was granted the visas (three for each child). Eight similar cases are documented in our report, but thousands of children remain in limbo. Why is it deemed acceptable for children from southern Africa to be kept apart from their mothers for extended periods of time? Echoes of Windrush abound.Tricia SibbonsDirector, Action For Southern AfricaPatricia ChinyokaFounder, Women of Zimbabwe
I wholeheartedly agree with John Harris and the 'bitter absurdity' of the situation both in the NHS and the care sector. Last summer, my 90-year-old mother collapsed and was taken to A&E in Worthing. The department was massively busy, patients were being cared for in the corridor and ambulances were arriving with alarming regularity. The bay my mother was in was staffed by two nurses from overseas, who cared for all their patients with exemplary professionalism and kindness.
I was, however, horrified to hear overtly racist comments being made by patients, with one declaiming loudly: 'Look what has happened to our NHS.' Bitter absurdity indeed. I left the department feeling immensely grateful to the staff and incredibly angry and embarrassed by what I had witnessed. Sally Smith Worthing, West Sussex
John Harris's article is timely, but immigrants and their offspring are not only the backbone of the NHS. My Guardian is delivered by an Indian, and my teeth are maintained by an Indian. Our postman of 20 years is Chinese; our local station is opened and closed at ungodly hours by a Nigerian woman; our supermarket tills are almost exclusively staffed by south Asians; our cat is regularly jabbed by people from Spain, Poland and India; and the drivers on our local bus route have recently included people from Ghana, Nepal, Somalia and Albania.
In addition to all these good people, when I fell downstairs and broke my fibula five years ago, it was excellently repaired by a Turkish Cypriot. This demonising of migrants has to be exposed for the evil that it is. Remember that the Hallelujah Chorus was written by an economic migrant.Warwick HillmanPinner, London
Do you have a photograph you'd like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers' best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Record
24 minutes ago
- Daily Record
NHS Dumfries and Galloway predicts budget burst of £28 million in 2025/26 financial year
The overspend is down from the £33.6 million previously expected and includes £21.7 million of cuts. The financial picture of Dumfries and Galloway's healthboard is improving ... but not enough to win approval from the Scottish Government. A report for Monday's board meeting of NHS Dumfries and Galloway revealed an overspend of £28 million is expected in the current financial year. That's down from the £33.6 million prediction at the last meeting. However, the Scottish Government has set a target of a £25 million overspend. Finance boss Katy Kerr's report states the previous draft plan, submitted at the end of March, was not approved. And while 'additional Scottish Government funding' and 'local improvements' have led to the expected overspend being brought down, it still does not meet the requirements of Scottish Ministers. The previous meeting was told that, as things stood, NHS Dumfries and Galloway was due to overspend by £95 million over the next three years. That position has been improved, with the budget burst now expected to be around £87.5 million. That includes £66.7 million worth of savings over the same period. Ms Kerr reported that more than 50 savings schemes worth around £15 million have been found for the current financial year. The savings target is £21.6 million – more than the record £20.1 million the health board saved last year. Members approved the financial recovery plan on Monday and chief executive, Julie White, said: 'This past year's savings have been hard-won, delivered through changes to financial controls, service reviews and transformation which have impacted the way we work right across oursystem. 'But we're now in a position where we have to go further, and faster. 'The next phase of recovery will be even more difficult, and it will require difficult decisions. 'To deliver the level of savings required, we will have to become more efficient and consider further changes to the way in which we deliverservices. 'We will, however, continue to focus on delivering improvements to our performance, particularly our waiting times for planned and unscheduled care. 'We've shown this year that progress is possible. But we need to be honest about what comes next. 'Recovery at this scale means changing how we deliver care. 'Our focus will be on protecting what matters most — that is the delivery of front line core NHS services to the highest possible standards within our available resources, but we need to be clear this requires us to modernise our provision through areas such as a greater use of technology and digital innovation.'


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Britain morphing into ‘National Health State', says think tank
Britain is turning into a 'National Health State', a think tank has said after the Chancellor gave the NHS a major funding boost in her spending review. The health service was the big winner of Wednesday's spending review, receiving an extra £29 billion per year for day-to-day spending and more cash for capital investment. Overnight, the Resolution Foundation said Rachel Reeves's announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.' Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although the think tank's director Paul Johnson warned the money may not be enough. He said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up. 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police. She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books. She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast. 'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.' Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review. She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
The NHS will receive £6bn in funding. Here's how it will be used
Rachel Reeves has pledged a £6bn investment to accelerate NHS tests and treatments, following substantial budget increases. The funding aims to provide new scanners, ambulances, and urgent treatment centres, delivering up to four million more tests and procedures in five years. This investment supports the government's goal of reducing NHS waiting lists in England, with Labour aiming for 92 per cent of routine operations to be carried out within 18 weeks. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the investment will generate millions more diagnostic tests, scans, and procedures, building on 3.6 million extra elective care appointments already delivered. Health leaders are sceptical, with Matthew Taylor of the NHS Confederation warning that the £29bn increase may not cover rising costs and guarantee waiting time targets, while Sarah Woolnough of the King's Fund questions how all NHS needs can be met with this settlement alone.