Strong case for change

WHILE I must thank you for printing my letter (Citizen July 11), I must draw your attention to some errors which though they did not fundamentally effect the meaning of my letter, were possibly a little confusing.

These were, in corrected form: that “I am married to a Filipina” (Filipino subject). The words “moral ride” should have read “moral code” and in reference to God, the word “Him” should have been in capital letters. Some of these errors were possibly due to my atrocious handwriting but I thank you all the same.

One thing that I might have added is that Dr Cox (Citizen story June 27 regarding a couple’s fight to settle in the UK) and myself are British subjects and also, as a consequence of this, subjects of the EU. Somewhere, within the EU constitution, are the words which state that no citizen of any EU country should be treated any differently from the citizen of another EU country.

Yet here we are with an immigration policy which is so radically different from any other EU state that British Citizens are (and seemingly always will be) permanently disadvantaged. The function of a British Government should be to protect its people and not to “criminalise” these for doing something which is their right anyhow.

When my wife came into this country (legally) the visa was issued subject to the provision that there was to be ‘no recourse to public funds’ which also applied to me as a British passport holder.

That being the case I suggest that the Home Office had already accepted her as being half British by the taking away of my rights.

I can see no other explanation. If any of this should helped Dr Cox then I would be happy to share notes with both him and his family. I have no knowledge of law at all but I’m just exercising a little common sense, together with this and a little humanity and respect (for marriage).

I would think that there could be a very strong case for amendment.