Turn on thread page Beta

B864 - Foreign Military-serving Translator Relocation Bill watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    B864 - Foreign Military-serving Translator Relocation Bill, The Hon. Nigel Farage MEP

    Age of Criminal Responsibility Bill 2015

    A
    BILL
    TO


    A bill to relocate translators who provide translation services to the British Armed Forces to Britain.

    BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—


    1 Qualification

    (1) Any person who qualifies may be relocated to the UK.
    (2) Translators eligible must have provided translation services for over 2 years to:
    a. the British military.
    b. British government officials in the warzone
    (3) Further qualifications:
    a. The translator must have provided translation services to the British military after 7th October 2001.
    b. The translator must show themselves and any eligible family members to be in danger if they remain in their home country.
    i. This must be done in the same way asylum seekers show they are in danger if they return to their home country.
    (4) Family members eligible for relocation
    a. A spouse
    b. A child under the age of 18
    c. A disabled child for whom the translator being relocated to Britain is the main carer.

    2 Relocation and entitlement

    (1) The translators and any eligible family will be relocated to the UK.
    (2) Each translator will entitled to the same welfare, and public services as British citizens.
    (3) Each translator and eligible family member will be placed on a maths course, or an English course, or both. People excluded from this are:
    a. People who hold qualifications in maths or English to a level equal to GCSE.
    b. Children under the age of 18 will receive their education through schooling in the UK.

    3 Eligible conflicts and wars

    The conflict or war must meet the following qualifications to before translators serving in it are covered by this bill;
    a. Have MP approval after a vote in the House of Commons.
    b. Involve the deployment of more than 3000 British military personnel in a combative role.

    4 Extent, commencement and short title

    (1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom
    (2) This Act comes into force on the day on which this Act is passed.
    (4) This Act may be cited as the Selected Individuals Relocation Act 2015.

    Notes

    This bill aims to relocate translators who provided services to the British armed forces to Britain starting with the Afghan translators from the war in Britain. Not relocating translators in danger to safety deters other locals from providing translation services to British soldiers, or government officials in future conflicts.

    The 7th October 2001 marks the start of the 2001 Invasion of Afghanistan which is the first conflict this bill covers.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    Seems like a sensible bill.

    Should you not be Rt. Hon. rather than Hon.?

    Edit: Agree with Cranbrook on the point about having to prove themselves in danger. I'd also support lowering the 2 years of service to 1.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Why is this titled the Age of Criminal Responsibility Bill 2015?:confused: Why only after 2001? And I disagree with the bit about having to be in danger - anyone who has given a vital service to the UK military such as translation should have automatic rights to settle here imo.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    This seems like a sensible proposal.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    Why does the war/conflict have to be approved by the House? Whether the House approves of the conflict or not, it doesn't change the fact that someone helped by providing translation services.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    I think if the PM or whoever sends out military personnel without a vote in government we should still have an obligation to take in such translators.
    Also why 3000? It seems totally arbitrary. Which conflicts would that rule out?
    Lastly, the disabled child clause, the translators spouce could also be the main career & they might have children. Also children under 18 might be married and Have children who should be allowed in too. And any other elderly dependants.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    "Age oh criminal responsibilities bill"

    Might want to fix that bit

    Also missing a "be" in 2.2

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    What's up with the title?
    Offline

    11
    Aye, seems reasonable (setting aside the title mix-up).
    I'd rather see § 1(2) changed from two years to one year though. Any length of service to the British army is enough to put translators at risk, and I think one year is a more reasonable cut-off point.
    In § 1(4) I'd like to see the definition broadened to include anyone for whom the translator is the main carer and provider. For example, if they have an elderly grandparent who relies on them, they would either have to abandon them to move to Britain, or remain in danger.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Aye, but you may wish to review the title.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    I love the idea and the reasoning is just and sound. I'd be the first to welcome these individuals with open arms. Great PMB from the new leader of UKIP.

    I disagree with Section 3 until there comes a time when all deployment of our troops passes through Parliament. Its not the translators fault if the PM uses prerogative powers.
    As Aph has mentioned which conflicts does the 3000 troops threshold exclude?
    As Petros and Cranbrook have mentioned I feel that they are not being given sufficient privilege for their service if they must follow the same procedure as any asylum seeker. Its hardly an incentive.

    Generally the formatting and writing of the bill could be tightened up, but that'll hardly stop me from giving it my vote.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Ignoring the title, this is certainly an issue that has been ignored for too long.

    An excellent Bill, aye.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Disagree with s3. I also think that the wording should be amended to suggest that the relocation happens on application from the person being relocated - we're not just kidnapping people and bringing them to the UK. Apart from that, aye.

    Edit: Would also like a section "For the avoidance of doubt, this does not have any impact on immigration policy in other sectors".
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I have been accused of formatting errors in the past, none as bad though as the wrong title.

    The basic premise of the Bill I agree with, and look forward to the second reading with the correct title, and hopefully a recognition of all circumstances where translators have been provided. I doubt if we have sent 3,000 troops to peacekeeping missions or as part of UN forces, for example.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:

    (3) Further qualifications:
    a. The translator must have provided translation services to the British military after 7th October 2001.
    b. The translator must show themselves and any eligible family members to be in danger if they remain in their home country.
    i. This must be done in the same way asylum seekers show they are in danger if they return to their home country.
    (4) Family members eligible for relocation
    a. A spouse
    b. A child under the age of 18
    c. A disabled child for whom the translator being relocated to Britain is the main carer.
    Why just after Afghanistan? We shouldn't rank the service given just by which war was involved.
    It should be an individual of any age who has the translator as a primary carer.

    3 Eligible conflicts and wars

    The conflict or war must meet the following qualifications to before translators serving in it are covered by this bill;
    a. Have MP approval after a vote in the House of Commons.
    b. Involve the deployment of more than 3000 British military personnel in a combative role.
    Service is service, we don't have the right to rate and judge wars.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This is in cessation.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 17, 2015
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.