dunroving

A side effect of the new regs is that it can make things very difficult on the way in - I have no idea about the other end (preventing overstay), but it seems that is a separate issue. Getting them in is one thing; making sure they leave is another.

Whether we like it or not, having a large international student body makes good economic sense. They bring in a lot of money in fees, and we foster goodwill in people who will become our future business partners (consumers, etc.)

As with the marriage thing, the original intention has got mixed up with all sorts of unintended side-effects.

And it's a major PIA for people like me, who have to spend exponentially more time dealing with red tape to get legitimate international students into the country.

rebeccajo

I hate this "brightest and best" rhetoric. It makes me think of swastikas.

formula

The onus now is getting students' into the country who really want an education here. If they are good enough, then can they stay here. The days of a student visa being a way to be a UK citizen, is over.

The new rules say they can't have another student visa if they haven't shown academic progression. If you fail your course or keep doing low courses i.e. lots of English courses, then you can't have another student visa as you have to show academic progression.

There are now time limits to study for each couse i.e. 3/4 years as an undergraduate, then time for MSc and then time for a PHD. This is to make sure that only the genuine students come to the UK who really want to study and not those who try to drag out their student time, to get ILR under the 10 years of legal stay, rule.

Under the new student rules, only those studying at MSc or higher, can now bring their dependants' with them and only if as they study at a proper university or are government sponsored. Which means that mature undergraduates' can no longer bring their spouse and children with them, for their children to get free education and the whole family get free heathcare, plus their spouse being allowed to work full time on a student dependant visa. Genuine students are usually 18 when they start an undergraduate course and they won't have a spouse and lots of children at that age.

Many used the tier 4 visa student visa as a backdoor way to work in the UK, by studying at a dinkydoo college and then get citizenship. This has now been stopped too as they no longer have the right to work on their student visa if they attend one of those colleges and can no longer bring their spouse and children with them, or gain ILR that way.

Bright genuine students will still come to the UK. Those students who aren't wanted by companies or those who can't start their own business ( a new visa) will be able to return to their countries with a high status education. Those who were hoping to use the student route as a backdoor to a UK passport, will now not be attracted to the UK. That door has shut.

formula

It will be difficult for those students' that aren't that hard working, but you have to remember that companies want the brightest and best students to help their companies grow. These students' have something to offer the company.

The companies aren't there to provide a visa for those who didn't want to work hard at their studies, or to provide jobs for those who have a degree that is of little use to that company.

Thinking students will look at what companies want, before they select a degree and university. Then they will work hard to make sure they get a 2:1 or first.

dunroving

The downside of a more relaxed set of criteria is that students may get in but not progress. I've seen postgrad students funded by their country who couldn't graduate after several years of trying. The eventual outcome was that they were in deep sh*t with their country and returned home owing what was the equivalent in their currency and economy of a lifetime of earnings. I've sat in progress committee meetings where we just couldn't sign off on a progress report, but we knew the huge financial and personal cost to the student. I'm glad those days are gone.

Of course this wasn't just a function of immigration rules it was also a function of unethical motivations for universities to accept international students.

formula

That doesn't mean we get to choose the country we want to live in.

A Brit can go and have a '"family life" in another country; or they might already be having that "family life" in another country.

rebeccajo

The wheels of justice grind slow, but they grind fine.

http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2012/...ules-rejected/

The Upper Tribunal has rejected the Government’s attempt exhaustively to define the scope and meaning of Article 8 private and family life in the controversial new immigration rules introduced in July 2012. The case is MF (Article 8 – new rules) Nigeria [2012] UKUT 00393 (IAC) and the result will be no surprise to any lawyer.

In short the tribunal holds that immigration judges must start their determination of a human rights case by deciding the case under the immigration rules, including the rules that purport to define Article 8. If the case does not succeed under the rules the judge must go on and decide the case under what we might term ‘real Article 8′, as required by s.6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Convention itself.

formula

It still doesn't mean we get to choose the country we want to live in. But it is another nail in the EU coffin