Theresa May's immigration plan is a one-size-fits-none fix

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/26/theresa-may-migrants-immigration

Version 0 of 1.

Theresa May's leaked letter about family-route visas for non-EU nationals holds valuable insights into the motivations of the government.

May proposes upping the minimum income level to £25,700 (£50k if you have two children) and increasing probationary visas from two to five years. At the moment, family-visa applicants must show they have enough income to cover essential bills; most submit a budget to reflect their individual circumstances. This is to prevent migrants from relying on the state; what critics of family immigration don't realise is that most of us can't receive benefits. My biometric ID (remember those? You may not have them, but we do) clearly states "No public funds". Family migrants can – and do – go to work and pay into the system like anyone else.

The waiting time between obtaining your family visa and being allowed to settle permanently is two years. During this time we must pass the Life in the UK test, showing basic knowledge of British history, politics and culture. May makes no suggestion the Life in the UK requirement will be changed, so it's hard to see how having five years to take it guarantees a better level of integration than the current two years does.

The leaked proposals suggest that May thinks any problem can be solved by demanding more money, and that the people who can afford to pay aren't causing problems.

As a US citizen married to a UK national, I followed these changes with concern. No one disputes the right – indeed, the responsibility – of a government to oversee migration. Most of us who come here do not object to playing by the rules. But the reasons May gave for the changes are misleading. The consultation she references was heavily influenced by suggestions from the pressure group MigrationWatch and concerned mainly with forced marriage and money.

May writes the changes "will reduce the burdens on the taxpayer, promote integration and tackle abuse". This invokes a Britain of Littlejohnesque nightmares with borders easily infiltrated by sinister foreigners – a hilarious notion to anyone who's had to deal with the UK Border Agency's byzantine bureaucracy.

May claims raising the support level will "differentiate between genuine and non-genuine relationships". But forced marriage won't be prevented by these rules. It is also rare: about 400 cases a year.

High incomes and long waits are no guarantee against sham marriages either, despite what the tabloids claim.

Detailed spouse interviews might help but May has no plans to introduce these. In my experience the applications are more concerned with your bank balance than with the state of your union.

May claims family migrants burden the taxpayer, ignoring the fact that migrants are taxpayers too, and family-visa migrants pay plenty. We are not exempt from UK taxes just because we weren't born here. (I can assure the wags that I paid tax on my past income, but don't take my word for it – feel free to ask the HMRC.)

DWP statistics show foreign-born residents – at 13% of the population – represent only 6.4% of benefits claimants; 7% of foreign-born residents receive them, compared with 17% of UK-born residents.

The suggested income is at the upper boundary of what the consultation suggested. It's a one-size-fits-none solution that doesn't consider a family's real expenses, wealth such as house equity, or where they live. The threshold exceeds the average gross earnings in every region of the country apart from London. The majority of households would not meet this requirement.

The key to what these changes really mean is in the election pledge: Cameron promised to reduce net migration. That's not the number of migrants, that's the difference between migrants arriving and UK residents leaving. Sorry to break it to those who think the country is "packed full" or "under siege": the government is not interested in decreasing migration per se. They'd be as happy if loads of Britons left. Attacking the family route is the easiest way to do this. If a married couple cannot settle, not only has a migrant left, so has a UK citizen. This gets net migration down faster than controlling other visas. The approach is crafted to appear successful to the rightwing without producing meaningful change for anyone.

If I sound cynical about the government juking the stats that's because I am. In 2010 I changed from highly skilled migrant to a marriage visa out of attachment to my husband and our intent to live in the UK. Little did I think that it might have been better to stay with the visa I was on, or even remain single. Those aren't the kinds of jaded assessments you want to make when planning a life together.

Our situation is better than many because I was already working here, so my income counts on our applications. For those who meet abroad the picture is very different. Overseas income doesn't count unless you have huge savings to bring here. Couples getting handouts from their parents to "prove" their solvency are the norm.

Britons on disability would probably never be able to marry a foreigner with these changes. Consider as well same-sex partnerships, for whom moving elsewhere as a couple may not be an option whatever their income.

Since when was income correlated with how real love is, or how well anyone fits in? Being able to afford jumping through the hoops does not make my marriage more genuine than anyone else's. It just means I have the money and time to negotiate the new rules. Most overseas spouses will not be as lucky.

Vince Cable had it right when he criticised "the timewasting bureaucracy which stops foreigners working, studying in – or even visiting – Britain legitimately". The changes May suggests don't do much to worry the people who are staying illegally and cause a lot of stress for those who are on the level.

The foreign spouses and family members, and UK citizens who care about them, are paying the price for political expediency and pandering. Make no mistake, UK natives: this government wishes you would all just go away.

• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree