Exeter family's relief after immigration row 'victory'
The boys' father, Hugo, who has indefinite leave to remain in the UK, had appealed for the same visa for his sons.A Home Office email addressed to primary school pupil Guilherme in June said: "I am satisfied that there are no serious or compelling reasons to grant you settlement."I am satisfied that you could return to Brazil and continue your education in Brazil where you would have the option to attend an English-speaking school."Speaking before the Home Office reconsidered her family's case, the boys' mother, Ana, said: "In the beginning it was like the floor just opened for me - I couldn't understand what it meant".She said her sons told her they did not want to go to Brazil and they wanted to keep their friends at a school they enjoyed.Ana said: "We pay taxes every month and we do everything correctly and then suddenly we have this with our children - the most precious thing in our lives."It just makes you feel like nothing."
Hugo and Ana separated in 2022 and they said the separation - and their different stages in the immigration process - had led to the issues with the Home Office.The family arrived in the UK in 2019 with Hugo on a skilled worker visa due to his job as a a senior lecturer in computer science at the University of Exeter.In 2024 he was granted indefinite leave to remain.Ana gained a skilled worker visa in 2022 after starting work as a nurse at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital but will only be eligible for indefinite leave to remain after five years.The original Home Office email said both parents should be granted settlement at the same time, or be settled or a British citizen, unless one parent has sole responsibility for the children.
The Home Office said it would refund the cost of the original visa applications - about £3,000 per child - and allow a new application for both children as dependants of a skilled worker.Hugo spoke of his huge relief at the decision but said changes needed to be made.He said the experience had been "mentally draining and exhausting" but he and his family were now "excited for the future".He added: "The most appalling issue was the fact they wrote a very tough and somewhat threatening letter to a young child."The other issue is their rules don't seem to be fit for purpose in a scenario where you have different family arrangements."
Steve Race, the Labour MP for Exeter, argued the family's case with the Home Office and said there were "lessons to be learned" from the family's situation."When you've got cases that are slightly more nuanced, slightly more complicated, the Home Office needs to have processes in place to make sure they do look at what's going on with the family in the round and they don't put families through this process with all of the fear, stress and concern this has meant," he said.Race said the country needed "safe and secure borders" but also needed to treat families "who are here legally and correctly" in "the right way and with respect".The Home Office declined to comment on the case or the issues raised by the MP.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
27 minutes ago
- Times
Veterans minister may quit if Troubles-era troops lose immunity
The veterans minister is expected to resign over government plans to repeal the law that granted Troubles-era servicemen immunity from prosecution. Alistair Carns, a former Royal Marines commando, is said to have told ministers that he cannot support any proposal that would leave veterans vulnerable to criminal proceedings. Government sources said that Carns had made his position clear at a drop-in session for Labour MPs hosted by Hilary Benn, the Northern Ireland secretary, on Monday last week. Benn had invited colleagues to be briefed on the Northern Ireland Office's plans to replace the Legacy and Reconciliation Act, the 2023 law that ended dozens of civil cases and inquests examining killings during the Troubles. At its heart is a conditional amnesty for all suspects in historic cases related to violence during the conflict. Conservative MPs had long pushed for the legislation to protect former soldiers from prosecution but the act's provisions also apply to republican and loyalist paramilitaries, provided they co-operate with a new information recovery body. Labour's election manifesto pledged to repeal the law and Benn said last year that it was 'completely wrong' that it had barred victims' families from pursuing new inquests or civil action in the courts. He has promised to abolish immunity for suspects, including veterans. Carns, who was appointed to the government within days of his election to the Commons last July, is understood to have told Benn that he could not endorse new legislation, due to be published within weeks, that reopened the possibility of veterans being prosecuted. 'There is a huge row brewing,' a government source said, adding: 'Everyone has been left with the impression that this is a resignation matter.' The minister was not present when MPs debated a petition signed by 176,485 people opposed to Benn's proposals in Westminster Hall on Monday evening. Suggestions that he is hostile to any change in policy on Troubles prosecutions risk embarrassing No 10, which made much of the fact that Carns, who won a Military Cross and is among the most decorated soldiers to have sat in the Commons, joined Labour last year. Senior figures in Downing Street are increasingly nervous of the backlash to the legislation. While Carns has yet to clarify his position publicly, the government's veterans commissioners for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales signalled their opposition to any legislative change in a joint statement on Monday night. 'We stand united in our firm support of the motion to be debated in Westminster today. We are deeply concerned by the prospect of retrospective legal action being taken against veterans who were carrying out their lawful duties, often under immense pressure and threat. 'We urge the government to resist any changes to legislation that would reopen legal uncertainty for veterans of Operation Banner,' David Johnstone, James Phillips and Susie Hamilton said. 'Any proposed changes must be measured, fair and informed by the voices of veterans themselves — many of whom have already endured decades of scrutiny and hardship. 'This is not a call for immunity from the law, but for fairness under it. Veterans deserve clarity, finality and respect for their service.' They added: 'There can be no moral equivalence between those who served in uniform to uphold peace and the rule of law, and those who sought to destroy it through acts of terrorism.' During the debate, hundreds of soldiers who served during the Troubles descended on Parliament Square to protest against the plans. They warned that modern soldiers would hesitate to pull the trigger in combat if the government were to remove legal protections for troops who served in Northern Ireland. • Trauma of veteran who faced jail over SAS shooting of IRA members The former servicemen massed on motorbikes and blasted their horns while circling Parliament Square during a 'rolling thunder' demonstration. The riders have been campaigning on the subject since 2019, but said that Labour's reignition of the debate made this their most important event to date. Veterans from all three services said that the move had 'reopened old wounds' and was fuelling a recruitment crisis. They said that the move could also be dangerous for serving soldiers whose fear of being dragged through the courts later in life may prevent them from fighting. 'No one will want to the pull the trigger,' said Geoff York, 71, a former lance corporal in The Blues and Royals cavalry regiment, who served for six years in Northern Ireland. 'If they're doing this to us, they'll be doing it to those who served in Afghanistan, Iraq … In 30 or 40 years' time, when these young soldiers are our age, they'll be getting the same thing. It is already reflecting on recruitment. Recruitment is on the floor across the three services.' York said that during the Troubles, British soldiers carried a 'yellow card' detailing the rules of engagement, which instructed troops to give a person three warnings before opening fire. Any soldier involved in a shooting would be investigated by the Royal Military Police and the Royal Ulster Constabulary. 'They would say 'you were in your rights to open fire' but many years later it's come to bite us on the rear,' he said. Special forces soldiers have also criticised Labour's pledge to reopen investigations. In a joint statement shared with The Times, seven commanders of The 22nd Special Air Service Regiment, who served in the elite unit during the Troubles, said: 'We have already processed our grief within our units and with the families of our fallen comrades. 'There's nothing healthy about perpetually reopening these wounds through endless legal proceedings. The harsh reality is that these new hearings are an exercise in futility. The terrorists responsible for killing our colleagues have already been granted 'letters of comfort' — effectively immunity from prosecution. 'So while these investigations might reopen painful chapters for veterans' families, they cannot deliver any meaningful justice. The terrorists walk free while we debate the merits of investigating decades-old cases. 'Our fallen comrades would not want their deaths to be used as political leverage to keep their families and the families of their comrades who are now being hounded, trapped in an endless cycle of hearings and investigations.' Carns and the Ministry of Defence were contacted for comment.
BreakingNews.ie
39 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Omagh bombing inquiry seeks secret 15-year-old transcript from archive
The British parliament's rules watchdog has three-and-a-half months to decide whether to release a secret transcript, amid efforts to establish whether the 1998 Omagh bombing could have been prevented. Omagh Bombing Inquiry solicitor Tim Suter has asked for information about an allegation 'that police investigators into previous attacks in Moira, Portadown, Banbridge and Lisburn did not have access to intelligence materials which may have reasonably enabled them to disrupt the activities of dissident republican terrorists' in the Co Tyrone town. Advertisement The allegation is thought to have been made during a private session of the Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee almost 16 years ago, on November 11th, 2009. Conservative MP Simon Hoare warned there was 'no wriggle room' in the UK parliament's rules to hand over the information to the inquiry without MPs' say-so, because it previously went 'unreported'. Commons committees can refrain from reporting evidence in certain circumstances, for example, if it contains information which is prejudicial to the public interest. British MPs tasked the Commons Privileges Committee with looking at the 2009 transcript. Advertisement This seven-member group has until October 30th to decide whether to report and publish the evidence, which was originally given to the House by former senior police officer Norman Baxter. 'It is very hard for the House to decide whether or not to release evidence it has not seen and cannot see before the decision is made,' Mr Hoare warned. 'It is particularly difficult in this case, as that evidence may contain sensitive information.' The North Dorset MP added that the Privileges Committee 'might simply decide to publish it'. Advertisement Chairman of the Omagh Bombing Inquiry Lord Turnbull (PA) But the agreed motion will give the committee power to make an alternative recommendation 'on the desirability or otherwise of the release of the evidence to the Omagh Bombing Inquiry'. Privileges Committee chairman Alberto Costa, the Conservative MP for South Leicestershire, told MPs that his organisation 'stands ready to deal with this matter'. Ireland UK government has 'plain duty' to assist Omagh inq... Read More The independent inquiry chaired by Lord Turnbull will consider whether the Omagh bombing 'could reasonably have been prevented by UK state authorities'. The dissident republican bomb exploded in the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998, killing 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins. Advertisement Mr Hoare agreed with DUP MP for Strangford Jim Shannon, who was born in Omagh, after he told the Commons that 'justice' should be at the 'forefront of all right honourable and honourable members' minds during this process'.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Business news live: Rachel Reeves to address taxes and pensions in Mansion House speech
Tuesday brings Rachel Reeves ' Mansion House speech, with the chancellor expected to delve into pension reform and plenty more besides. There has been a push in some quarters for the chancellor to rip up fiscal rules limiting spending, which has been rejected by the government, and to bring in a wealth tax, which has not. It's not expected that ISAs will be a key focus now, with reform expected to wait until further discussions have taken place, but tax changes for businesses may still be on the agenda along with other initiatives as the government chases economic growth. Elsewhere, bitcoin has hit new highs of late and the FTSE 100 performed well on Monday - in contrast to other places in the stock market as tariff threats continue and a deal between the US and the EU appears no closer.
