'Inhumane, Short-Sighted'
During a debate in Westminster which was secured by a petition calling for the government to scrap the US$50,000 threshold, Scottish National Party MP Stuart McDonald quoted a member of his constituency who could face deportation under the new rules, despite holding three university degrees.
"This £35K [US$50] threshold determines the worth of an individual based solely on income rather than contribution to society, which is not just inhumane — it's short-sighted. The UK will lose essential staff like nurses, teachers, and care workers, and for what?
"I sincerely hope that Parliament will think better of this fooling knee-jerk policy," she states, as read out by Stuart McDonald.
#ImmigrationBill is nasty, punitive & lacking evidence base, & will undermine precisely the social cohesion Minister says she cares about
— Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) October 13, 2015
Tommy Sheppard SNP MP for Edinburgh East suggested that:
"If we had not had immigration or migration over the centuries, this world would be a much more miserable and unlivable place than it is today."
The debate was the first time MPs had the chance to analyze the US$50,000 threshold for non-European Union workers since it was pushed through without a Commons vote in 2012. It's due to come into effect in April and will mean migrant workers who have lived in Britain under the Tier II visa system could be deported unless they prove they will earn at least US$50,000.
'Ludicrous & Arbitrary'
"Tier II visas, let us remind ourselves are given to people who are coming to work here in a job that has already been advertised locally," Mr Sheppard argued.
"I want to question… the rationale, the logic, behind saying people have to earn a certain amount of money, a certain salary, to be able to come here, but a different amount of money, a different salary, to be able to stay here… That seems ludicrous; and the £35,000 [US$ 50,000] a year figure is arbitrary."
Mr Sheppard also read out a letter written to him by one of his constituents who believed the Home Secretary's proposals reflected a preference towards high earners in private sectors over non-EU migrants working in the public sector and creative industries.
"The Secretary of State has a value system behind this — that they view some jobs as more important than other and that if someone is working in banking or financing and earning a good salary, they are regarded as inherently more valuable and someone we would want more than someone who is working in a lower-paid job in our public services or the arts and creative industries," the letter stated, as read out by Mr Sheppard.
Thorn in Britain's side: 'nasty' immigration bill may increase #racism http://t.co/BbLKKxvtJP #MigrantCrisis pic.twitter.com/KQsePKhWGq
— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) 14 October 2015
Honing in on the point that the creative industries in Britain would suffer from the threshold, Mr Sheppard said you can't tell people: "to practice the arts here, you have to be in a job earning £35,000 [US$50,000] a year or you can't do it.
"As soon as we begin to do that, not only will that culture begin to ebb away and things will get that much duller, less creative and less exciting as a result… people will go elsewhere," Mr Sheppard argued.
Strong argument & support from @Stuart_McDonald at the Non-EU £35k threshold debate: https://t.co/8lSfOKqpj3 pic.twitter.com/RdxSu74i7X
— Stop35k (@stop35k) March 8, 2016
The Stop35Kcampaign released a statement following the debate:
"We urge the government to reconsider the implementation next month, and give the Migrant Advisory Committee an opportunity to complete a thorough assessment of suitable pay thresholds across jobs and geography in the UK."
The commodification of non-EU immigrants is set to come into force next month. Theresa May was criticized for not being present at the debate which was only attended by seven SNP MPs, three Conservative MPs and two Labour MPs.
