This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/24/the-guardian-view-on-the-home-office-a-culture-of-cruelty

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The Guardian view on the Home Office: a culture of cruelty The Guardian view on the Home Office: a culture of cruelty
(about 1 month later)
When government decisions ruin lives it is often a result of incompetence. But when the Home Office is involved it is as likely to be vindictive. That department’s institutional cruelty has once again been exposed by the forcible removal of more than 1,000 people and the withdrawal of visas from tens of thousands more on a blanket supposition that their language qualifications were fraudulently acquired.When government decisions ruin lives it is often a result of incompetence. But when the Home Office is involved it is as likely to be vindictive. That department’s institutional cruelty has once again been exposed by the forcible removal of more than 1,000 people and the withdrawal of visas from tens of thousands more on a blanket supposition that their language qualifications were fraudulently acquired.
There is not proof to any recognised legal standard that each individual really cheated in the test of English for international communication (Toeic). Yet Theresa May, home secretary at the time, presumed guilt. In a pattern familiar from the Windrush scandal, the imperative of the “hostile environment” superseded considerations of justice and due process.There is not proof to any recognised legal standard that each individual really cheated in the test of English for international communication (Toeic). Yet Theresa May, home secretary at the time, presumed guilt. In a pattern familiar from the Windrush scandal, the imperative of the “hostile environment” superseded considerations of justice and due process.
Some cheating certainly took place. A Panorama investigation in 2014 uncovered evidence of corruption in at least two test centres. In response, Education Testing Service (ETS), the US company that held the contract to administer the tests, told the Home Office that the vast majority of results were unsound. ETS claimed to have conducted voice reviews of 58,458 recorded tests and determined that only 2,039 were definitely valid.Some cheating certainly took place. A Panorama investigation in 2014 uncovered evidence of corruption in at least two test centres. In response, Education Testing Service (ETS), the US company that held the contract to administer the tests, told the Home Office that the vast majority of results were unsound. ETS claimed to have conducted voice reviews of 58,458 recorded tests and determined that only 2,039 were definitely valid.
That is improbably low. For 90% of tests to be potentially dodgy, the entire process would have to be captured by criminality. If that was the case, a thorough investigation was required. But no Home Office minister took responsibility or showed interest in such an apparently epic failure of the system. Either the Home Office believed ETS and neglected the scale of the fraud, or didn’t believe the numbers and hounded innocent people regardless. ETS has not shared the evidence. With no right of appeal it has been hard to bring clarity in court. The few cases that have been heard have vindicated candidates’ claims to have passed the test legally. Some victims of the purge did not attend the centres where they are alleged to have cheated. Some are fluent English speakers for whom the test was a formality and had no reason to cheat. People have been crushed by the shame of a false allegation that poisons family relations and blights careers.That is improbably low. For 90% of tests to be potentially dodgy, the entire process would have to be captured by criminality. If that was the case, a thorough investigation was required. But no Home Office minister took responsibility or showed interest in such an apparently epic failure of the system. Either the Home Office believed ETS and neglected the scale of the fraud, or didn’t believe the numbers and hounded innocent people regardless. ETS has not shared the evidence. With no right of appeal it has been hard to bring clarity in court. The few cases that have been heard have vindicated candidates’ claims to have passed the test legally. Some victims of the purge did not attend the centres where they are alleged to have cheated. Some are fluent English speakers for whom the test was a formality and had no reason to cheat. People have been crushed by the shame of a false allegation that poisons family relations and blights careers.
If Mrs May had been interested in running a fair immigration system, she would have looked sceptically at the ETS numbers. Instead she let an uncertain volume of cheating become the pretext for indiscriminate withdrawal of rights as part of a political agenda to drive down migrant numbers at all costs. The current home secretary, Sajid Javid, has disowned Mrs May’s hostile environment policy but he is also touted as a candidate for the Tory leadership, which creates incentives to sustain an anti-immigration tone. The Toeic cases are a test and an opportunity for the current home secretary. They will reveal whether Mr Javid’s claim to independence from Mrs May’s legacy includes a capacity for justice in immigration matters that she never grasped.If Mrs May had been interested in running a fair immigration system, she would have looked sceptically at the ETS numbers. Instead she let an uncertain volume of cheating become the pretext for indiscriminate withdrawal of rights as part of a political agenda to drive down migrant numbers at all costs. The current home secretary, Sajid Javid, has disowned Mrs May’s hostile environment policy but he is also touted as a candidate for the Tory leadership, which creates incentives to sustain an anti-immigration tone. The Toeic cases are a test and an opportunity for the current home secretary. They will reveal whether Mr Javid’s claim to independence from Mrs May’s legacy includes a capacity for justice in immigration matters that she never grasped.
Sajid JavidSajid Javid
OpinionOpinion
Theresa MayTheresa May
Windrush scandalWindrush scandal
Commonwealth immigrationCommonwealth immigration
English language testing scandal
editorialseditorials
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content