Tougher UK immigration laws: Drop the outrage, please!

A new proposal to crack down on spousal visas in Britain has sparked the usual ire among the South Asian immigrant community. "Under Theresa May's new rules, immigrants will have to earn £18,600 or more to bring in a non-EU spouse, rising to £27,200 for three children. May is clearly implying that poor people can't and don't contribute to society," writes an indignant Shazia Mirza in the Guardian."All my parents' relatives came here with nothing, with nowhere to live, let alone an £18,600 salary. Today most of them are millionaire businessmen in Birmingham and have contributed hugely to the economy by supplying kebabs to drunken people in the city centre on a Saturday night."[caption id="attachment_342082" align="alignleft" width="380" caption="A new proposal to crack down on spousal visas in Britain has sparked the usual ire among the South Asian immigrant community. Reuters."][/caption]Fair enough. Folks like Mirza have every right to be at the attitudes of their government toward non-EU and poor immigrants. But what about all the harrumphing closer to home?"The UK government's proposal to introduce draconian norms for British citizens and residents wanting to bring their spouses over from non-European Union countries represents an increasingly virulent anti-migrant streak," warns a Times of India editorial, which describes the proposed law as part of a broader move "towards protectionism," and ends on this sanctimonious note: "In creating obstacles to bringing over spouses from non-EU countries, immigrants are bound to feel unwelcome. In terms of economy, society and culture, Britain has benefited tremendously from multiculturalism. It must hold on to its liberal ethos and rethink its immigration norms."We are always quick to get on the high horse about immigration laws of other countries. Merely raising the H-1 B visa fees, for example, can generate vociferous angst, and prompt a disapproving statement from government officials.And yet here is our home ministry explaining the logic  behind the Indian government's minimum salary requirement of $25,000 for employment visas:

There's a huge number of low skilled and unskilled workforce in India and we have to cope with huge unemployment. Hence the salary threshold has been set which helps to differentiate between skilled and unskilled jobs. Different countries have different ways to protect their own workers and we have chosen this route instead of numeric caps.

Exactly! So why get our panties in a twist over Britain's laws or even those of the United States.Now, blinkered double standards are not limited to us Indians. Take, for instance, this silly 2009 op-ed  titled "Outdated visa rules don't support dual careers in India" in the Wall Street Journal:

Countries ranging from the UK, US, Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore all recognize a category of highly skilled global employees or intra-company transferees and allow their spouses to seek employment freely or with the minimum of procedure. In India, on the other hand, even an application made while in the country to convert the visa to an employee status, or to be self-employed, is simply not entertained.

The author – and the WSJ editors – clearly need a lesson on rules governing an H-4 visa, which prevent a spouse from even taking on unpaid volunteer work. (The Indian government has since removed the said restrictions on foreign spouses, The H-4 rules, however, remain stubbornly in place, though there is a Homeland Security proposal to relax the same.)To be fair, until recently, most employment restrictions on foreigners in India were honoured in name only. With the rising influx of foreign workers, enforcement has necessarily become more rigorous, even as the laws become more stringent. But that said, let's give that moral indignation a rest.Indian immigration laws are labyrinthine and our consulates are most often a nightmare – just ask anyone (Indian or not) who has been forced to seek their services. And most Indians believe it is entirely fair and reasonable to restrict employment visas to foreigners who are "useful" to us as a nation. Well, so do the Brits, apparently.If we're going to push for more open immigration laws abroad, we must be willing to embrace them closer to home. Or else, we end up sounding like self-serving whiners who want the freedom to roam the world in search of opportunity, but are unwilling to offer the same to those who knock on our doors.