Latest news with #UkraineFamilyScheme
BBC News
03-04-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Ukrainian refugees can apply to stay longer in Peterborough
Ukrainians are now able to sign up for a scheme which allows them to remain in Peterborough for a further 18 Ukraine Permission Extension scheme (UPE) has been made available to those already granted permission to stay in the UK under other schemes, including Homes for Ukraine, the Ukraine Family Scheme or Ukraine Extension a full meeting in March, Peterborough City Council revealed it had only spent half of its £3m funding for supporting Ukrainians in the city since 2022, the Local Democracy Reporting Service Jones, Labour cabinet member for housing and communities, explained the money was ring-fenced and likely to be unused for the three-year period. She noted the council would not receive any more government funding to support Ukrainian refugees, but the authority could use the remaining unspent ring-fenced funding, understood to be about £ council's Help scheme also offered support for Ukrainians in Peterborough. Applications can only be made by those whose current permission has 28 days or fewer remaining until it council warned that early applications for the scheme may not be accepted and late applications may lead to permissions being UPE extends the offer of temporary sanctuary for Ukrainians and their eligible family members following expiration of their three-year well as allowing the refugees to stay for another 18 months, it provides them with the same entitlements to work, study, rent and receive applying on the government website, as well as providing proof of identity and relevant documents, the Home Office will consider applications and make a decision within eight weeks. Follow Peterborough news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
The National
20-02-2025
- Politics
- The National
Labour MPs lobby Keir Starmer to allow Gaza families into UK
Keir Starmer has been urged to allow Palestinians to come to the UK after he promised to close a loophole that allowed a family from Gaza enter on a scheme intended for Ukrainian refugees. The UK's Prime Minister has been asked by MPs in his ruling Labour Party to clarify what he meant when he made his pledge in the House of Commons, after a judge's widely criticised decision allowed the family of six to come to the UK. The 15 Labour MPs were joined by others from the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the SDLP, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru, as well as the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, a vocal supporter of the Palestinian cause who now sits as an independent. John McDonnell and Apsana Begum, two of the Labour MPs who remain suspended over the two-child benefit cap rebellion, are also signatories. In their letter they say: 'Basic humanity shouldn't be selective. If Britain supports safe routes and medical evacuation for some, why should it be any different for families fleeing conflict in Gaza? 'We would be grateful if you could clarify what 'loophole' in the Ukraine Family Scheme the Home Secretary is looking at closing as a result of the application by a Palestinian family, and what the justification for taking such an action would be.' The family acknowledged that it did not qualify under the Ukraine scheme but chose that route to submit its details to the British immigration system. Although initially rejected as ineligible by the UK's Home Office, the family, living in Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza, managed to have the case heard by a tribunal that considered European human rights laws rather than the Ukraine issue. The father's brother has lived in the UK since 2007 and the family won an appeal to be reunited with him under human rights laws protecting 'family life'. Judges at the appeal said the parents and their four children were living in 'extreme and life-threatening' conditions in the refugee camp, after their home was destroyed by an air strike during Israel's assault on the enclave. Government lawyers had argued that granting the family reunion would be 'a leap', given that there is no resettlement scheme for Palestinians equivalent to the 267,000 visas granted to Ukrainians. However, the immigration court dismissed concerns that its decision would open the 'floodgates' for refugees from other war zones to move to Britain. Mr Starmer told the House of Commons the decision was "wrong" and said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper "has already got her team working on closing this loophole". He was responding to a question from Kemi Badenoch, the leader of Britain's Conservative opposition, who had called for 'radical changes to human rights laws' to prevent courts deciding who can enter the UK. 'We cannot have judges simply making up new schemes based on novel and expansive interpretations of human rights law,' she said.
Telegraph
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour MPs attack Starmer and say Gazans should be given refuge in Britain
Sir Keir Starmer is facing demands from Labour MPs to allow Gazans to come to Britain. The Prime Minister has vowed to close a 'loophole' in the Ukraine Family Scheme, first revealed by The Telegraph, that allowed a Palestinian family the right to enter the UK. But 15 Labour MPs have now signed a letter demanding that he justify his plan and suggest that Gazans should be offered the same refuge as Ukrainians because 'basic humanity shouldn't be selective'. The Telegraph exposed the case where a judge had allowed a family of six seeking to flee Gaza to join their brother in Britain. Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor ruled that the Home Office's rejection of their application made through the Ukraine Family Scheme breached their human rights. The case is part of a series of examples of migrants or convicted foreign criminals using human rights laws to remain in the UK or halt their deportations, which include the case of an Albanian criminal whose deportation was halted partly because of his young son's aversion to foreign chicken nuggets. The decision by the immigration judge to grant the Palestinian migrants the right to live in the UK after applying through the Ukrainian refugee scheme was criticised by Sir Keir at Prime Minister's Questions last week. He said it was the 'wrong' move and announced that Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, was looking at ways to close the 'legal loophole' to ensure it would not happen again. The comments sparked a rare public row between the Prime Minister and Baroness Carr, Britain's most senior judge, who called on him to 'respect and protect the independence of the judiciary'. Some 31 MPs, including 15 from Sir Keir's own party, have now rounded on the Prime Minister over his response to the decision. In the letter published on Wednesday, they urged him to clarify his statement in the comments and provide justification for any potential action. The signatories include Ian Byrne and Richard Burgon, two of the Labour MPs who have only recently been admitted to the party after being suspended over a rebellion over the two-child benefit cap last year. I've co-ordinated a cross-party letter urging the PM to clarify his comments on closing a 'loophole' in the Ukraine Family Scheme that allowed a Palestinian family to stay in the UK. Basic humanity shouldn't be selective - if we help some fleeing war, why not families from Gaza? — Kim Johnson (@KimJohnsonMP) February 19, 2025 The letter states: 'Basic humanity shouldn't be selective. If Britain supports safe routes and medical evacuation for some, why should it be any different for families fleeing conflict in Gaza? 'We would be grateful if you could clarify what 'loophole' in the Ukraine Family Scheme the Home Secretary is looking at closing as a result of the application by a Palestinian family, and what the justification for taking such an action would be.' It is also signed by John McDonnell and Apsana Begum, two of the Labour MPs who remain suspended over the two-child benefit cap rebellion, and five Labour MPs from the 2024 intake. Other signatories include Kim Johnson, a prominent Left-wing Labour MP, Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader, and MPs from the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the SDLP, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru. Sir Keir said at PMQs last week: 'Let me be clear, I do not agree with the decision. She's right that it's the wrong decision… 'But let me be clear: it should be Parliament that makes the rules on immigration, it should be [the] Government that makes the policy. 'That is the principle and the Home Secretary is already looking at the legal loophole that we need to close in this particular case.'
Yahoo
18-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Cooper defends Government's immigration tribunal criticism after judge's rebuke
Yvette Cooper defended Government criticism of a decision allowing a Palestinian family to come to Britain after the country's most senior judge rebuked Sir Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch for political exchanges about the case. The Home Secretary said Labour would press ahead with its plan to close 'loopholes' in the system which she suggested had led to the claimants being granted right to remain after applying through a Ukrainian refugee scheme. The family, who have been granted anonymity, appealed against a decision dismissed by a first-tier immigration tribunal judge in September but a further appeal was allowed by upper tribunal judges in January. During Prime Minister's Questions last week, both Sir Keir and his Conservative opposite number described the finding as 'wrong' in heated exchanges which were later branded 'unacceptable' by Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr. But Ms Cooper held firm on Tuesday, saying: 'We've been very clear that this was a case that we fought, and this is the case that we fought in the courts, and that this is a case that we disagreed with, and it's why we're looking at the loopholes that need to be closed.' In last week's PMQs, Sir Keir had said the Home Secretary had got her team 'working on closing this loophole' after the Tory leader questioned him about the decision. Baroness Carr told reporters on Tuesday: 'I think it started from a question from the Opposition suggesting that the decision in a certain case was wrong, and obviously the Prime Minister's response to that. 'Both question and the answer were unacceptable. 'It is for the government visibly to respect and protect the independence of the judiciary. 'Where parties, including the government, disagree with their findings, they should do so through the appellate process.' The judge said she has written to the Prime Minister as well as to the Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood, who is also Justice Secretary, about her concerns. The family applied for entry to the UK using the Ukraine Family Scheme to join the father's brother, who has lived in the UK since 2007 and is a British citizen, but this was refused in May last year after the Home Office concluded the requirements of the scheme had not been met. An initial appeal was dismissed but a further appeal was allowed by upper tribunal judges on the grounds of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to family life, after a hearing in January. Responding to a question from Mrs Badenoch last week, Sir Keir said: 'I do not agree with the decision. 'She's right, it's the wrong decision. She hasn't quite done her homework, because the decision in question was taken under the last government according to the legal framework for the last government. 'But let me be clear, it should be Parliament that makes the rules on immigration. It should be the Government that makes the policy, that is the principle, and the Home Secretary is already looking at the legal loophole which we need to close in this particular case.' The Tories dismissed Baroness Carr's concerns on Tuesday and argued that politicians should be able to discuss issues of 'crucial public importance'. Mrs Badenoch said: 'This doesn't compromise the independence of the judiciary. 'The decision to allow a family from Gaza to come to the UK was outrageous for many reasons. The Prime Minister couldn't even tell me whether the Government would appeal the decision. 'He pretended he was looking at closing a legal 'loophole'. This is not just some legal loophole that can be closed, but requires a fundamental overhaul of our flawed human rights laws.' Speaking to reporters, Baroness Carr also highlighted her concerns about 'what appears to be a mounting campaign of attacks on judges'. She said: 'It is not acceptable for judges to be the subject of personal attacks for doing no more than their jobs – their jobs to find the facts on the evidence before them and apply the law as it stands.' She added that if judges get it wrong, the protection is a challenge on appeal, and if the legislation is wrong it is Parliament's prerogative to legislate. Baroness Carr continued: 'They (judges) do not court publicity, and they cannot speak out to defend themselves. They speak only through their judgments, and frankly, judges deserve better. 'A directly related issue is security. Concerns over judicial security are at an all-time high, unfair or sensational, negative reporting creates real everyday risks to the safety of judges and their families.' A Government spokesperson said: 'The Prime Minister has made clear that it is for Parliament to make the laws and for the Government to decide policy. 'Where the law is not working as we think it should be, the Government will take action to tighten up the rules – and that is what we are doing. 'As a former chief prosecutor, the Prime Minister's respect for the judiciary, the role they play in our democracy and the rule of law is beyond question.'
Yahoo
18-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Badenoch dismisses concerns of judge over immigration tribunal PMQs exchange
The Tories have dismissed the concerns of the most senior judge in England and Wales over last week's Prime Minister's Questions, insisting the exchanges did not compromise the independence of the judiciary. The Lady Chief Justice said she was 'deeply troubled' about last Wednesday's Commons session, in which Sir Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch criticised an immigration decision. A judge had granted a Palestinian family the right to remain in Britain after they applied through a scheme designed for Ukrainian refugees, which both the Prime Minister and Conservative leader said was 'wrong.' Responding to Baroness Carr's rare intervention on Tuesday, Ms Badenoch insisted that 'Parliament is sovereign' and politicians must be able to discuss matters of 'crucial public importance' to the UK. 'This doesn't compromise the independence of the judiciary,' she said. 'The decision to allow a family from Gaza to come to the UK was outrageous for many reasons. The Prime Minister couldn't even tell me whether the Government would appeal the decision. 'He pretended he was looking at closing a legal 'loophole'. This is not just some legal loophole that can be closed, but requires a fundamental overhaul of our flawed human rights laws.' In last week's PMQs, Sir Keir had said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper had got her team 'working on closing this loophole' after the Tory leader questioned him about the tribunal's findings, which she said were 'completely wrong.' The family, who have been granted anonymity, had an appeal against the decision dismissed by a first-tier immigration tribunal judge in September but a further appeal was allowed by upper tribunal judges in January. Baroness Carr told reporters on Tuesday: 'I think it started from a question from the Opposition suggesting that the decision in a certain case was wrong, and obviously the Prime Minister's response to that. 'Both question and the answer were unacceptable. 'It is for the government visibly to respect and protect the independence of the judiciary. 'Where parties, including the government, disagree with their findings, they should do so through the appellate process.' The judge said she has also written to the Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood, who is also Justice Secretary. Responding to Baroness Carr's comments, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said politicians are 'perfectly entitled to comment on decisions by judges'. He added: 'This is especially the case with human rights-based cases, where judges have adopted increasingly bizarre and expansive interpretations of vaguely worded ECHR clauses.' The family of six at the heart of the case brought up in the Commons – comprising a mother and father and their four children who were aged 18, 17, eight and seven in September – were displaced when their home in the Gaza Strip was destroyed by an air strike in the Israel-Hamas war. They applied for entry to the UK using the Ukraine Family Scheme to join the father's brother, who has lived in the UK since 2007 and is a British citizen, but this was refused in May last year after the Home Office concluded the requirements of the scheme had not been met. Responding to a question from Mrs Badenoch, Sir Keir said: 'I do not agree with the decision. She's right, it's the wrong decision. She hasn't quite done her homework, because the decision in question was taken under the last government according to the legal framework for the last government. 'But let me be clear, it should be Parliament that makes the rules on immigration. It should be the government that makes the policy, that is the principle, and the Home Secretary is already looking at the legal loophole which we need to close in this particular case.' Speaking to reporters, Baroness Carr also highlighted her concerns about 'what appears to be a mounting campaign of attacks on judges'. She said: 'It is not acceptable for judges to be the subject of personal attacks for doing no more than their jobs – their jobs to find the facts on the evidence before them and apply the law as it stands.' She added that if judges get it wrong, the protection is a challenge on appeal, and if the legislation is wrong it is Parliament's prerogative to legislate. Baroness Carr continued: 'They (judges) do not court publicity, and they cannot speak out to defend themselves. They speak only through their judgments, and frankly, judges deserve better. 'A directly-related issue is security. Concerns over judicial security are at an all-time high, unfair or sensational, negative reporting creates real everyday risks to the safety of judges and their families.' The Lady Chief Justice said judicial security had been an issue ever since she took up office, and it is a matter that came to a very 'dramatic and concerning head' with the attack on Judge Patrick Perusko, during which a radiator was thrown at him at Milton Keynes Family Court at the end of 2023. Baroness Carr added that it was an 'incredibly serious attack', but that 'the silver lining of the very dark cloud' was it made everyone sit up and make sure that as much as possible is being done to 'preserve the safety of judges in courts and tribunals'. She also said that she has been looking at Canada, where they have a dedicated police unit devoted to judicial security, adding: 'I think that we are, at the moment, potentially behind the curve.' Baroness Carr continued that sometimes judges are subject to 'devastating social media attacks', and they can either disengage completely – which potentially means credible threats are missed, or engage, in which case they may be 'traumatised' by reading this absolutely horrendous material. A Government spokesperson said: 'The Prime Minister has made clear that it is for Parliament to make the laws and for the Government to decide policy. 'Where the law is not working as we think it should be, the Government will take action to tighten up the rules – and that is what we are doing. 'As a former chief prosecutor, the Prime Minister's respect for the judiciary, the role they play in our democracy and the rule of law is beyond question.'
