Joint Memorandum submitted by the British
Council, the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, the
Council for International Education (UKCOSA) and the Association
of Recognised English Language Services
1. We understand that the Sub-Committee's interest
in entry clearance operations in New Delhi and Islamabad includes
student applications, and would be grateful if its members would
take note of our concerns in relation to this group.
2. Evidence brought to our attention highlights
three main problems.
(i) Good students are refused visas on the
grounds that the entry clearance officer is not satisfied that
they intend to leave the UK at the end of their studies (see paragraph
57(iv) of the Immigration Rules).
(ii) There are delays after the visa application
has been submitted.
(iii) There is a widespread view among student
applicants that entry clearance officers are insensitive and rude.
The first problem applies to both Delhi and
Islamabad, and to many other entry clearance posts. The second
and third relate to Islamabad in particular.
3. Our organisations represent institutions
and international students in the public and private sectors,
at both higher and further education levels, as well as schools
of English. Nearly a million international students study in the
United Kingdom in the course of a year. They are a valuable asset
to the institutions that receive them, to other students with
whom they mix and to the United Kingdom as a whole, bringing many
educational, cultural, political and financial benefits. International
students contribute at least £2 billion to the national economy
each year.
4. In both India and Pakistan there is a growing
interest in and demand for educational courses in the United Kingdom.
Although most students who apply for entry clearance at the posts
in New Delhi and Islamabad are granted visas, many students experience
worrying difficulties in obtaining a visa, particularly at the
latter post. The apparent difficulty and hostility to be overcome
in obtaining a visa may prevent some potential students from applying.
In the short term potential income to the UK is likely to be reduced
because of this; in the longer term, negative attitudes to the
UK will have far reaching effects on all aspects of our relationships
with the countries concerned. This is in marked contrast to the
positive marketing strategies undertaken by our main competitors
in the international student market, such as Australia.
5. Similar problems arise in many posts, but
we confine our comments to the posts that the Sub-Committee is
considering. Our views are based upon:
— recent enquiries and feedback to
our organisations from UK institutions;
— observations of local staff of The
British Council;
— discussions with prospective students
at UK education exhibitions in Delhi and Islamabad;
— the experience of staff from The
British Council and UKCOSA who recently visited entry clearance
posts at New Delhi and Islamabad.
6. The Rules require entry clearance officers
to make a judgment as to the applicant's current intentions. To
form a view, entry clearance officers will look at an applicant's
background and circumstances, including employment, career prospects,
finances and family ties. We are aware of numbers of students
who feel that they have been unjustly refused a visa on the grounds
that the officer is not satisfied that they intend to leave the
United Kingdom at the end of their studies. These are often students
who are starting their careers and have not established an employment
history in their country, or who have relations living in the
UK. They regard British educational qualifications as being of
high quality and likely to enhance their career prospects in their
own country. They conclude that they are being denied access to
important educational opportunities by entry clearance officers
who are interpreting their intentions wrongly; that officers base
their judgments not on the student's present intentions but on
the officer's view of whether the student might change his mind;
and that there is little they can do to persuade the officer that
the judgment is wrong, as the premise on which it is based is
purely hypothetical. In some cases officers also take it upon
themselves to make judgments they are not qualified to make about
the value and relevance of particular courses or qualifications,
to individual applicants or more generally. The teaching of English
in England makes a major contribution to the national economy,
but one ECO was heard to tell an applicant he would do better
to study it in his own country.
7. We recognise that the "intention to
leave" requirement is not easy for entry clearance officers
to deal with. We encourage the Sub-Committee to consider whether
the guidance given in the Diplomatic Service Procedures manual
and the training of entry clearance officers could be improved
to give more assistance to officers in assessing a student applicant's
intentions.
8. Generally the impression given by the entry
clearance post in Delhi is positive. Institutions have reported
few difficulties. Representatives from the British Council and
UKCOSA visited the post in November 1996, met senior staff and
discussed issues related to students at some length. In addition,
the British Council and UKCOSA visitors presented a well-attended,
half-day training session to entry clearance officers and local
British Council personnel about international students in the
UK. Staff at the Delhi entry clearance post were welcoming and
helpful. After the visit a fast-track system for student applications
was developed, which involves close co-operation between the local
British Council office and the entry clearance post, and is proving
to be popular and successful.
9. The impression given by the post in Islamabad,
on the other hand, is largely negative. Student applicants and
local advisers speak of unreasonable delays and rude staff. In
the summer of 1997 computer problems at the post exacerbated the
delays. Delays were particularly serious for students who were
eager to arrive in the UK by the start of a course, and for the
institutions that were expecting the students.
10. Representatives from the British Council
and UKCOSA visited the Islamabad post in October 1997. They were
not able to deliver the planned training for entry clearance officers.
There seemed to be little interest in the concerns of UK institutions.
One of the entry clearance officers was confrontational and aggressive.
11. The British Council and UKCOSA representatives
observed two entry clearance interviews in Islamabad and read
the interview notes of two others. The observers found the interviewing
officers to be impatient, aggressive and insensitive to language
and cultural differences. This was consistent with the experience
of many local students. The observers wondered whether the rudeness
of the officers was tactical, used to unsettle the applicants
and provoke inconsistencies, or arose naturally.
12. Their experience of entry clearance officers
can lead many students to form the view that the United Kingdom
is a hostile, unwelcoming culture. Our organisations, UK educational
institutions and government departments concerned with education
and exports promote the UK as a friendly, supportive environment
in which to study. The behaviour and attitudes of some entry clearance
officers in Islamabad (and, it must be said, in other posts) undermine
these endeavours and may impede the international educational
mobility that benefits the UK in a variety of ways. We recognise
that ECOs are at the sharp end, and that they have to weed out
any bogus applicants, but there is still tremendous scope to improve
the way in which they deal with applicants.
13. These complaints are not new, nor are they
limited to ECOs in Islamabad. Indeed, the good record in India
is a rarity. Real damage is being done to the UK's interests.
We ask the Sub-Committee to consider the need for the following
changes:
(i) Top management in the Home Office, and
to a lesser extent in the FCO, need to change the internal culture
towards visa applicants. The recognition in the Diplomatic Service
Procedures manual that the UK has a high degree of self-interest
in receiving foreign students and that genuine students are welcome
in the UK should be reflected in action to ensure that applicants
for student visas are treated with politeness at all times and
that their applications are treated with despatch.
(ii) The culture change should therefore
lead to a change in the behaviour of ECOs. Appropriate behaviour
can be encouraged by the kind of training offered by the British
Council and UKCOSA. They are willing to provide more of it, but
such training can only be effective if its messages are fully
supported at all levels within the Home Office and the FCO.
(iii) A review of the Diplomatic Service
Procedures manual covering entry for studies should be undertaken
to ensure in particular that the objective of the "intention
to leave" requirement is clearly expressed, fully understood
and consistently applied.
February 1998
| 
