ARRANGED MARRIAGES IN THE UK: SOME POLICY SUGGESTIONS

Alistair McConnachie writes: Ann Cryer MP makes the following points and suggestions in her article on arranged marriages, posted below:

1) Although 14 per cent of the population of her constituency of Keighley is Pakistani and 2 per cent Bangladeshi, they nevertheless account for approximately 50 per cent of her constituency workload.

2) The Government is going to introduce an age limit of 18 years for those seeking to act as "sponsors" for spouses. That means, the "sponsor" -- which is the bride or groom-to-be in this country -- must be at least 18 years old. However, Ann Cryer believes the age requirement for sponsors should be raised higher still to 21.

3) There is no age limit for "applicants" to enter this country -- that is, the prospective groom, or bride who arrives from the foreign country. Ann Cryer describes the example of a 15-year old girl who was brought over -- which seems astonishing since this is under the age of consent! Surely an equivalent age requirement for applicants as for sponsors, of at least 18, is necessary.

4) A husband who has been granted "indefinite leave to remain" is immediately free to divorce his wife and act as a "sponsor" for a new bride-to-be in his home country, even though he is not even a British citizen. A probationary period of one year has been increased to two, but Ann Cryer suggests he should not be able to do this until he is eligible for citizenship after five years.

FEMINISM IN RETREAT FROM MALE TRADITION
Women are the victims of a crisis in masculinity in the Asian community,
argues Ann Cryer
TRIBUNE
26 September 2003, pp.16-17.

IT IS a sad fact that feminism is in retreat under pressure from Asian "leaders" with support from white "politically correct" men to such an extent that the patriarchal culture and traditions of rural villages in the sub-Continent have been allowed to influence British society and delay the introduction of much-needed legislation.

The same "leaders" who were dragged kicking and screaming into recognising the realities of forced marriages seek to label anyone who dares to challenge the status quo as Islamophobic or accuse them of "demonising" the Asian community. Such critics are unable to accept that the problems I have raised are not imagined and that I, as an MP committed to the betterment of all my Constituents, particularly the most vulnerable, have a duty to act.

About 14 per cent of the population of Keighley is Pakistani and 2 per cent Bangladeshi. They account for approximately 50 per cent of the workload in my constituency office. It is this daily contact, particularly with women, that has brought the difficulties within those communities to my attention.

At the heart of the problems I see is a crisis of masculinity within the Asian community. It is torn between a desire to protect traditional, patriarchal values of the rural communities of their ancestors, where the concept of honour (or izzat) is enshrined in the selfless love of the woman as defined by the man, and a modern society where women are seen to be equal with their own rights. The forces of traditionalism are attempting to ensure that the latter does not encroach on the former.

A meeting of the "community leaders" in Keighley or Bradford will involve a handful of men. When the "community" is consulted, it will be the very same men who are asked to comment. Why is it that, in the 21st century, it can be deemed acceptable to have a consultation without taking into consideration the views of 52 per cent of that community?

On those occasions when women have been involved, for example in the aftermath of the Bradford riot in 2001, they played a significant role by taking their sons off the streets and, in some cases, directly to the police station.

The foundation of the (unelected) authority of many of the "leaders" is based on the assumed submissive nature and ignorance of women. It appears to suit their own aims, rather than the good of the community they purport to represent, to keep things as they are. They seem content to live with the poverty and deprivation that is associated with under-achievement and unwilling to address the repercussions of the clash of cultures experienced by their children who are caught in the conflicting values of the Western society in which they are growing up and the cultural values of their parents.

I have lost count of the number of desperate young women who have come to see me, sometimes in fear of their lives, who do not want to marry a first cousin (with whom they have nothing in common) in Pakistan, but who realise that, by saying so, they run the risk of shaming their family (as defined by their fathers and, sometimes, their brothers).

The Government's decision to introduce an age limit (18 years) for those seeking to act as sponsors for spouses who originate from outside the European Union for immigration purposes should be warmly welcomed. Some girls in Keighley, promised to a first cousin in Pakistan from an early age, were denied the right to an education on the grounds that it was unnecessary. At the tender age of 16 or 17, these girls were unaware of their rights and did not know where to turn for help. Many just went along with the wishes of the family without considering their own ambitions. The age limit of 18 (although I would have preferred 21, in order to allow the completion of higher education) allows the girl that extra space for maturity.

Although the age limit applies to sponsors, there is no such limit on the age of applicants. If we are to protect young British people, surely the same standard of defence should apply to those seeking to enter this country? I have recently been involved in the case of two young sisters who arrived in Britain in 2002 as spouses to two brothers (and their first cousins).

The girls were 15 and 16 when they arrived. For several months, they were locked in a cellar if they did not do as they were told by their in-laws and were subjected to domestic slavery. When they were rescued by concerned relatives, they were found to be suffering from malnutrition and had been physically abused. They are now safe but, had there been an age limit of 18, these girls would not have been allowed to enter Britain.

It appears that marriage is often being used as a tool in an attempt to perpetuate rural traditions as part of this crisis of masculinity. I have been asked to advise in a number of cases where the woman, a British citizen, has sponsored her husband's application to join her in this country. The husband is usually a first cousin. However, as soon as indefinite leave to remain has been granted to the husband, he has chosen to divorce his wife and sought to remarry and bring a second (perhaps more subservient) spouse from Pakistan.

The Government has recognised this to be a problem and the probationary period of one year has been increased to two. I would go further and suggest that only British citizens are permitted to act as a sponsor. The two-year probationary period and a further three years before one is eligible for citizenship could well deter young Pakistani men from abusing immigration regulations at the expense of the human rights of women.

Ann Cryer is Labour MP for Keighley

Any who sponsors their partner to come to the UK should take those two years as a trial to see if they can work out their marriage faithfully. If any doubt, they sould consider applying for an extension for stay. Those whom applied for Indefinate leave to remain in the UK, tough luck! best thing I could suggest is to tear that page of Indefinate leave to remain in UK or bin it. If after that your spouse does not commit to marriage, call police and accuse them of domestic violence. If he/she has a criminal record they will be automatically deported under the British Law. GoodLuck to all and God bless you with a successful marriage.

anonymous 24 mar 2009, 09:47 - Denunciar