Talk:Windrush scandal

Jack Straw?

A recent edit states, without citation, that the hostile environment policy was instituted by Jack Straw. After a bit of web searching, I can't see any evidence to support this, so I'm going to remove it. -- The Anome (talk) 10:37, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@192.173.3.110: and it's been added again, again without a citation, so I've removed it again. 192.173.3.110, could you please read WP:CITE? -- The Anome (talk) 10:53, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Most of the immigrants that arrived on the Empire Windrush had been born in the colonies prior to independence hence they had been born British subjects and so if the immigrants or Home Office had taken the case(s) to court the Home Office would have lost, as the immigrant's children would have been British citizens by both place-of-birth and by descent. The immigrants only had to produce proof of birth in a UK colony, e.g. by a birth certificate, etc., to establish a right of abode in the UK. Prior to the movement towards independence after WW II any Empire citizen/British subject had a right of abode in any Empire country.

Hence any attempted deportation of these people would have been unlawful. Considering the number of lawyers that feature as UK MP's one would suspect that they aren't very good lawyers to not know this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.10.224 (talk) 07:35, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Restructure

I've created a sandbox here try to make this more coherently organised - other editors are welcome to edit or comment in that sandbox as they see fit. Pincrete (talk) 09:22, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm now working on trying to structure the 'Main' sections and add recent developments.Pincrete (talk) 13:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Work in progress

I am currently attempting to restructure the article into chronological and thematic sequence. Therefore I am sometimes leaving tags on short pieces which I know to be sourcable, but where I need to refind the best source. Where these do not seriously violate BLP or NPOV - I hope other editors will be tolerant of temporarily missing sources. Thanks. Pincrete (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Not covered at present

This is a sketchy list of topics not covered clearly at present IMO - some of which might better be covered at "hostile environment policy", which at present is thin on details.

How/why affected children born in UK

Better summary of Parliamentary stages (compensation scheme, hotline etc)(Rudd, May and Javid), changes made by Javid, internal enquiry etc.

Hostile environment criticised by others (Warsi etc)

Review of provisions of HEP inc: NHS etc requirement to share data with Home Office as part of HEPolicy - later amended partly due to Lords during scandal. … Review of use of anti-terror laws vis-a-vis HEPolicy - mainly non-Windrush.

Video (my job to make your life hell)- HEP?

Broader issues - immigration caps - immigration policy. (partly done), Pincrete (talk) 12:24, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Home Office under fire over Commonwealth deportations

This reference may be useful

• https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/03/home-office-under-fire-over-commonwealth-deportations-windrush

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 09:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Home Office criticised for ‘lack of urgency’ in Windrush scandal

And this one

• https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/05/home-office-criticised-for-lack-of-urgency-identifying-victims-of-windrush-scandal

John Cummings (talk) 09:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

John Cummings, I am (almost) the only editor to have edited this article - and frankly, I got a bit bored and disillusioned at keeping the article up to date (almost) alone. I made a list some time ago (above) of areas not covered presently - and the developments/inaction since early summer have not been added by me - or anyone. If you (like me) think that this is an important topic, the best course of action for you is to try to update the article yourself. Pincrete (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Pincrete:, thanks for your reply, I've been doing something similar with Home Office hostile environment policy updated. Lets just leave these here as notes for now and I'll come back to it and add them in. I'm mainly leaving things here so they don't get lost.

Best

John Cummings (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Number of people deported?

How many people were deported??? Was anyone? several were stranded in the Caribbean for a period of years, but denied re-entry is not deported. I deleted 63 from the article because it's not supported anywhere in link 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.109.76.170 (talk) 13:53, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

"Windrush Scheme" & "Windrush Taskforce"?

These two terms do not even appear anywhere in the article?! There is the "Windrush Scheme" that is being dealt with by a specific administration team, the "Windrush Taskforce", yet the article features virtually nothing about either. (See full details here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/windrush-scheme )

Additionally, the Windrush scandal involves more than those with Caribbean decent. Anyone from most Commonwealth countries, or associated countries like even Ireland, are caught up in the Windrush Scheme, as under the Schemes guidelines it also applies to those who hold non-"British Citizen" passport holders (e.g. "British Subject", with full abode vignette printed within their passports [1]) being able to avail themselves of international immigration controls (like ESTA) that are available to full "British Citizen" passport holders. The article makes little to no mention of this issue, either (see: Talk:British nationality law and the Republic of Ireland). --Jimthing (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

This issue is now proven untrue. See the above talk page for info. --Jimthing (talk) 01:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Presumption of guilt article

Csn any experienced editor here help prevent the much-needed [Presumption of guilt]] article being deleted? Crawiki (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Nothing to do with the Windrush

Despite the media labelling this the Windrush Scandal it must be pointed out that virtually everyone who came to the UK on the Windrush in 1948 is now dead or in their 90s. This furore therefore has nothing to do with the Windrush. If Wikipedia wants to be respected for truth this should be prominently pointed out. 2A00:23C4:B607:CF00:9429:2DD7:B488:B2A7 (talk) 10:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

There is no 'Windrush', the boat was called The Empire Windrush, the fist period of immigrants - until the late 1960s became informally known as 'the Windrush generation', the scandal took up that name. Nowhere in the article is it implied that any, or all the victims came on the boat itself. Actually, a few of those threatened with deportation HAD actually been on the Empire Windrush, boat and yes, they were by then in theit late 80s or 90s. WP refers to topics by the name commonly used in sources. Pincrete (talk) 12:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)