> Home Secretary Priti Patel added: "I am proud to be launching this new and exciting route as part of our points-based immigration system which puts ability and talent first, not where someone comes from."
For this visa route to "put ability and talent first", the policy would have to be designed to look for and accept evidence of those traits in whatever forms are available.
But this visa does not place ability and talent first, as most talented people cannot go to Ivy League and equivalent for other reasons, and the visa criteria don't accept other evidence of exceptional talent and ability. I have nothing against great universities (I went to one and have a poor family background), but access to wealth, historical family wealth, and factors such as race and country of birth play a big role statistically in who attends the top few.
As for "not where someone comes from", as the article notes the visa is entirely closed to people graduating in the countries of South Asia, Latin America or Africa. Regardless of demonstrable talent, those at the top of the league in the wrong countries don't qualify for this "not where someone comes from" visa.
For me, the most dispiriting thing is that the UK is codifying a broken "meritocratic" system, with the flaws you identify, along with dubious rankings into international law.
What you're pointing out — that individuals should be allowed visas based on whatever merit they can make an argument for — should be the obvious thing. Why it gets buried in these layers of sociopoltically dysfunctional nonsense is beyond me.
I would go even further personally in opening up national borders, but I increasingly feel a political anomaly. A strong state in my opinion should afford opportunities for everyone to demonstrate contribution, and only take that away when someone has become a demonstrated risk.
As an aside, I'm from a so-so third-world country (Nigeria), and the best graduating student from my recent university set got a Gates Cambridge scholarship for a PhD in a science field. She's wicked smart and hardworking, and the UK will most likely make better use of her talent compared to my country.
It's a bit sad (to me) that they limited this opportunity to graduates of the world's top universities and excluded disadvantaged/poorer countries as a result. But, such is life. I can't dictate to foreign countries and voters who or not they should let into their borders.
This policy is 100% voter appeasement and only to score political brownie points. If you graduate from a top Uni you'll have no issue getting a Tier 2 sponsorship (which costs less than £1000 per year plus some £200 per case for a company).
According to this list, only six out of the eight Ivy League schools [1] are worth applying to and apparently schools like Waterloo, Lomonosov State, and Les Grandes Ecoles, all of which have turned out some of the most brilliant scientists and mathematicians, aren't even worth considering.
I never cared for green card/visa thing... If I'm going to uproot my family for a few years I need to know that the path for full immigration and citizenship is well set.
Clicked around for a bit and age does not appear anywhere that I can find. It appears that a 40+ year old person could return to (an eligible) university for a second degree and then make use of this scheme.
Perhaps the cohort size is going to be too small for them to care.
"I am proud to be launching this new and exciting route as part of our points-based immigration system which puts ability and talent first, not where someone comes from."
> To qualify, a person must have attended a university that appeared in the top 50 of at least two of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings, or The Academic Ranking of World Universities in the year they graduated.
> The list of eligible universities from 2021, published online by the government, featured 20 US universities, including Harvard, Yale, and MIT.
> There were a further 17 qualifying institutions, including the University of Hong Kong, University of Melbourne, and the Paris Sciences et Lettres University.
> Some academics have voiced their disappointment that no South Asian, Latin American or African universities have been included on the list.
Heh, horrible Priti Patel[1], implementing in the UK Trump's "No shithole countries" policies.
People who graduated from a top 50 university probably won't have a problem finding a job/visa sponsorship anywhere in the world anyway, it makes me wonder how the UK think this will attract them.
With the UK foreign policy wildly oscillating in the past decade, if I were to take this option - I would do this cautiously. No one wants to move lock stock and barrel to a country to be again facing the prospects of being uprooted because of some new populist policy nulling it.
Readit News
For this visa route to "put ability and talent first", the policy would have to be designed to look for and accept evidence of those traits in whatever forms are available.
But this visa does not place ability and talent first, as most talented people cannot go to Ivy League and equivalent for other reasons, and the visa criteria don't accept other evidence of exceptional talent and ability. I have nothing against great universities (I went to one and have a poor family background), but access to wealth, historical family wealth, and factors such as race and country of birth play a big role statistically in who attends the top few.
As for "not where someone comes from", as the article notes the visa is entirely closed to people graduating in the countries of South Asia, Latin America or Africa. Regardless of demonstrable talent, those at the top of the league in the wrong countries don't qualify for this "not where someone comes from" visa.
In related news yesterday, an official Home Office report concluded "30 years of racist immigration legislation designed to reduce the UK’s non-white population". https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/may/29/windrush-sca...
Call me cynical, but I think today's announcement is another point on that trend line.
What you're pointing out — that individuals should be allowed visas based on whatever merit they can make an argument for — should be the obvious thing. Why it gets buried in these layers of sociopoltically dysfunctional nonsense is beyond me.
I would go even further personally in opening up national borders, but I increasingly feel a political anomaly. A strong state in my opinion should afford opportunities for everyone to demonstrate contribution, and only take that away when someone has become a demonstrated risk.
It's a bit sad (to me) that they limited this opportunity to graduates of the world's top universities and excluded disadvantaged/poorer countries as a result. But, such is life. I can't dictate to foreign countries and voters who or not they should let into their borders.
So whom are these visas for?
According to this list, only six out of the eight Ivy League schools [1] are worth applying to and apparently schools like Waterloo, Lomonosov State, and Les Grandes Ecoles, all of which have turned out some of the most brilliant scientists and mathematicians, aren't even worth considering.
[1] No Brown or Dartmouth in town.
Clicked around for a bit and age does not appear anywhere that I can find. It appears that a 40+ year old person could return to (an eligible) university for a second degree and then make use of this scheme.
Perhaps the cohort size is going to be too small for them to care.
Subtle dig across the Atlantic?
> The list of eligible universities from 2021, published online by the government, featured 20 US universities, including Harvard, Yale, and MIT.
> There were a further 17 qualifying institutions, including the University of Hong Kong, University of Melbourne, and the Paris Sciences et Lettres University.
> Some academics have voiced their disappointment that no South Asian, Latin American or African universities have been included on the list.
Heh, horrible Priti Patel[1], implementing in the UK Trump's "No shithole countries" policies.
People who graduated from a top 50 university probably won't have a problem finding a job/visa sponsorship anywhere in the world anyway, it makes me wonder how the UK think this will attract them.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/priti-patel