Advertisement

As the royal wedding approaches, we should think of the couples who could be separated post-Brexit

Having only known one another for two years, the imminent taxpayer-funded wedding has already secured her right of abode in the UK
Having only known one another for two years, the imminent taxpayer-funded wedding has already secured her right of abode in the UK

There has been rightful indignation in your columns and elsewhere to the Windrush immigration debacle, which is only the latest scandal to face Theresa May as she panders ever more to her right wing.

EU citizens living in the UK without a proof of residence, relying on their EU status, will apparently have a year to prove right of residence – but at a cost and process for which the Home Office is not geared up to deal with, or ever likely to be. Hopefully, it is why recent defeat by the Lords on the customs union is so important, and might just cause the government to take stock.

We have relatives and friends with long-term well established partners and spouses who are EU citizens; they work, pay UK income tax, have national insurance cards, pay council tax and hold EU passports. None of them are dependent on the state, yet all have hitherto assumed that their right of UK residence was secured by UK EU membership and the key principles it upholds.

This is a position replicated amongst many of the three million EU citizens living in the UK, and the two million UK citizens living in the EU; at five million people, that is a total equivalent to the population of Scotland. So there is still no clarity for any of those individuals.

Meanwhile, the Labour opposition remains relatively silent on trying to secure the rights of EU and other overseas partners and spouses of UK citizens before Brexit. Indeed, many of the Labour Party appear to blame migrants for the UK economic and social ills, when it was their previous policies and attitudes that have contributed to many of the problems the UK now faces, and may have swayed the referendum result to its narrow victory for Leave.

There is a superb opportunity for the UK government and Theresa May to show some statesmanship and magnanimity over this process. The country is one month away from the royal wedding: a wedding to be paid for in part by UK taxpayers, some from the Crown Estate and general taxation covering security, policing and the associated ceremonial – the latter of which we do so well.

The UK government is underwriting the wedding for Meghan Markle, a wealthy 36-year-old, to Prince Harry, a wealthy 33-year-old by dint of his royal status. Yet having only known one another for two years, that has already secured her right of abode in the UK, while EU citizens in longer term, well-established relationships with UK citizens are not so fortunate.

So, a proposal for May and her government: concede the right of residence to EU citizens in much longer established long-term relationships now, so that ordinary citizens who are footing the bill for the royal wedding can also benefit from knowing that their future in the UK is secure in perpetuity, just as that of Meghan Markle will be.

L N Price
Horsham

Theresa May has caused chaos in the UK

Surely even Theresa May must know she should resign now. The sheer callousness of Windrush makes many of us embarrassed to be British and bewildered about our so-called leaders. She presided over that debacle, the police cuts that increase stabbings and bombings and then there’s the utter chaos and lunacy of her Brexit negotiations. A stuffed parrot could do better.

Stefan Wickham
Penang, Malaysia

The system isn’t working if we can’t provide the right palliative care

Your article titled ‘Burden of patients with multiple diseases could sink health systems around the world‘ highlighted the alarming fact that people with multiple health conditions aren’t receiving the care they need, and deserve. As a medical director for Marie Curie, I help patients who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and often have complex conditions.

Through our research we know that in England alone, 44 per cent of adults in the last year of life have multiple long-term conditions. But our health and social care system is sadly not equipped to provide individualised care to every person living with multiple diseases. When terminally ill patients slip through the cracks, it can mean they die without the dignity we all deserve and often in unnecessary pain.

Palliative care professionals will tell you that you need to holistically treat the person, not the disease. We know this approach increases quality of life, but a lack of awareness around what palliative care can achieve means that patients and their loved ones will continue to be let down by a system that isn’t just struggling to cope – it’s drowning.

Dr Adrian Tookman, medical director at Marie Curie

The Lib Dems must take some responsibility for the Coalition’s immigration policies

Your report that Lord Kerslake, head of the civil service in the period 2012-14, said that some members of the administration (possibly senior politicians) described government policy towards migrants as “reminiscent of the Nazis”, makes for depressing reading. The administration he refers to was the coalition government with the Liberal Democrats as junior partners.

It is inconceivable to me that Nick Clegg was unaware of the xenophobic attitudes shown by the Tories – the van with the threatening message to immigrants was obvious enough, but I cannot remember outraged protests from the Lib Dems during that period. Neither can I recall many protests on this overt racism from the rump Lib Dem (who was removed from standing by Tim Farron) at the last general election, when Theresa May was made prime minister almost by default after the cowardly resignation of David Cameron following the referendum result.

The appalling quagmire in which the government is now floundering, blaming civil servants for policies they themselves brought in – in spite of many warnings from wiser minds – was the result of decisions made during the coalition administration. The Lib Dems must accept some share of the responsibility.

Patrick Cleary
Honiton

Why weren’t the Windrush landing cards archived?

Given the huge amount of data such as shipping passenger lists which have been scanned, archived and made available for family historians online at the National Archives, it seems incredible that this was not considered as recently as 2010.

Could officials at the Home Office have anticipated that this information could become valuable and decided to pre-empt the possible storm? If so, it is impressive that anyone could have thought so far ahead – hard to believe, given the many examples of incompetence we see.

Niall Horn
Southampton

A British tradition taken too far

Having worked on a cruise ship for a short time many years ago as the Passenger Liaison Officer, I am well aware that the British love to complain. However, in recent times there have been some complaints that are quite illogical.

Recently, a person who lived near a farm complained of the clucking of the hens. Not so long ago, a newcomer to a village complained about the ringing of the church bells. And finally, a person complained about a stall holder advertising his fruit and vegetables in the time-honoured way of calling out about his products.

If natural farm sounds offend, why buy a property close to a farm? If you find normal village sounds, such as church bells annoying, why move to a village and live close to a church? If you find centuries old market traditions irritating, why go to the market?

Finally, why do the authorities jump when they receive just one rather irrational complaint?

Colin Bower
Sherwood