Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Non-UK Armed Forces Personnel: Immigration Requirements

05 January 2022 · 6 other contributors · 9,929 words

Opened by Dan Jarvis Lab Barnsley North

Responding minister: Kevin Foster

ImmigrationVeterans

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Dan Jarvis raised concerns about non-uk armed forces personnel: immigration requirements in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • Hon. Member Dan Jarvis highlighted cases of foreign and Commonwealth-born service personnel facing high fees for indefinite leave to remain, including Taitusi Ratucaucau's bill of 30,000 after emergency surgery.
  • Hon. Member Dan Jarvis requested the Government to update guidance, extend application time before discharge, and reduce costs of indefinite leave to 243 per person.
  • Government values non-UK nationals who serve in the armed forces and noted ongoing consultation on immigration requirements has been delayed by three months.

Key requests to Government

The hon. Member Dan Jarvis asked the Government to update guidance, increase the length of application time in advance of discharge, and ensure families are treated with dignity. He urged for meaningful reform to deliver justice to veterans and their families by lowering the costs of indefinite leave from £2,389 down to £243 per person.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Dan Jarvis Lab Barnsley North

The hon. Member Dan Jarvis highlighted the injustice faced by foreign and Commonwealth-born service personnel who are asked to pay exorbitant fees for indefinite leave to remain, despite risking their lives for Britain. He cited specific cases such as Taitusi Ratucaucau, a veteran from Fiji who was given a £30,000 bill after emergency surgery. Jarvis also mentioned Filimone Lacanivalu's deportation threat and the ongoing consultation on immigration requirements which has already delayed by three months. He pointed out that while most service personnel comply with Home Office rules, exceptional episodes like these should not be repeated.

Other contributors (6)
  • Dave Doogan SNP Angus and Perthshire Glens

    Commonwealth personnel have for decades served the UK armed forces, yet face immigration issues that should have been resolved years ago. The current income requirement of £18,600 for a spouse and additional fees are unreasonable, considering their service to the country. Families are separated due to high visa costs, impacting recruitment and military cohesion.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Mr Shannon congratulated the hon. and gallant Member for Barnsley Central on setting the scene and commended the hon. and gallant Member for Plymouth, Moor View for their contribution. He emphasized that those who serve in any branch of the armed services should receive fair treatment along with their families. He highlighted a concern about the Government's approach to immigration requirements for personnel after 12 years' service, stating it is insufficient. Mr Shannon also noted the difficulty faced by individuals and families in meeting the standard requirements for indefinite leave to remain under the family visa route.

  • John Cryer Lab Leyton and Wanstead

    John Cryer highlighted cases of constituents who served in the armed forces but faced difficulties accessing benefits due to unresolved immigration status, describing it as deeply ungrateful.

  • Johnny Mercer Con Aberdeen South

    Johnny Mercer congratulated Philip Hollobone for securing the debate and raised concerns about the consultation process being heavily influenced by the Government, noting that personnel serving around 12 years before getting a right to remain is stingy and out of sync with indefinite leave requirements. Mr Mercer expressed frustration over the Government's inaction on immigration requirements for non-UK armed forces personnel, highlighting the cost of £30,000 for implementing a change and criticising the 12-year settlement requirement as unjust. He urged MPs to focus on morality rather than politics when dealing with veterans' issues. Paid tribute to Stephanie Peacock's concerns but argued that the Government's proposals are inadequate and do not go far enough in addressing the issue of visa fees for Commonwealth service personnel. Emphasised that stopping the clock on deployment time is unacceptable. Corrected information about the 12-year engagement policy, stating it does not apply to long-serving personnel and calling it a 'huge red herring'. Asked how many Commonwealth veterans would benefit from the consultation proposal retrospectively applied in 2020.

  • Navendu Mishra Lab Stockport

    The MP paid tribute to serving and former military personnel, focusing on the Gurkhas' exemplary service and the discrimination they have faced. He highlighted the Government's recent proposal to waive immigration fees for non-UK armed forces personnel after 12 years of service but criticised the arbitrary nature of this timeframe and called for urgent action to address long-standing injustices such as pensions discrimination.

  • Stephanie Peacock Lab Barnsley South

    Veterans from the Commonwealth who serve in the UK armed forces should be allowed to remain in the country after five years of service, without facing extortionate visa fees. The current system leaves veterans and their families vulnerable to legal challenges and deportation. Responded to Johnny Mercer's intervention, stating that one in ten Commonwealth veterans would benefit from the proposals if applied retrospectively in 2020.

Government Response

Kevin Foster

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hollobone. I note your instruction to make sure there is at least three minutes left at the end for the hon. Member for Barnsley Central (Dan Jarvis). I thank him for securing the debate, and I thank all Members for their contributions. The Government strongly value every member of our outstanding armed forces, and we are grateful and humbled when non-UK nationals choose to serve our country. Special immigration rules apply to non-UK armed forces personnel, granting full exemption from immigration control status during service. Non-UK armed forces personnel can apply for indefinite leave to remain in the UK upon discharge if they have completed at least four years of service or been medically discharged due to their service. On completion of five years' service, Commonwealth citizens can choose to naturalise as British citizens while still serving. Additionally, there are specific citizenship provisions for children born to serving armed forces personnel, allowing them automatic acquisition of British citizenship under certain conditions. The Home Office and Ministry of Defence ran a joint public consultation last year regarding a policy proposal to waive settlement fees for certain non-UK service personnel in Her Majesty's armed forces, and the results have been analysed with plans to publish the response shortly. Family members of armed forces personnel enter the UK on a five-year limited leave to enter visa and can apply for settlement straightaway at the end of the five years. The consultation did not include proposals to waive fees for family members due to fairness concerns. I aim to provide further details about Hong Kong Military Service Corps veterans later this year.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy