Confused why this wasn't reported.

Thanks CJ, yes my pals at British in Europe said similar. Totally not a grinch move of course.

Yes I was overly condensing the problems there apologies, but just signalling that it’s not the end if the Home Office behave badly (with the caveat of daunting / costs and so forth.).

Yes that’s my experience as well. Their guidance is pretty clear that ‘exceptional’ really does mean just that. As an aside, depending on facts, that’s what the appeals process is for. But it’s daunting / expensive with lawyers.

Would you look at that. Clarification from the other place. What a mess.

Where did she say this? Hearing the announcement made me think it was designed to create a dividing line with Labour given the MIR’s political history.

Not forgetting the bizarre back and forth about the ‘permanent’ status of the ‘interim’ second perm.sec.

We shall see. This is all overture. I doubt the government can really do anything short term like this when it comes to Health and Social care. Need an actual plan to address the sector recruitment issues beyond this number game as per MAC reports.

Worth noting likely the figures will eventually show majority of sponsorship will be in Health and Social care sector. Given shortages, it will be surprising to see restrictions applying here. Highlights one of the many problem with the net migration number dogma.

Equivalent here for right to rent - going up from £3k to £20k, same timeline details here: statutoryinstruments.parliament.uk/instrument/E...