New visa rules for Woolas' Patagonian Lovelies

Hard to believe a Labour government minister would come out with something as crass as this:

I’m afraid to tell you that however lovely the two girls were, and they were, we can’t waive the immigration rules just because you like them.

Gawd, a line straight from the Politically Incorrect Handbook 1973.

The throwback in question was Immigration Minister Phil Woolas and he was speaking about the UK's new visa rules; would-be students from outside the EU will now have to speak English to a level just below GCSE standard rather than beginner level as at present. This proposed regulation has upset Plaid Cymru’s Elfyn Llwyd who has said that ""imposing the tough new system on Patagonian students who wish to learn Welsh will “make things 10 times worse”". The Immigration service has previous form on this. Last year two Patagonian women, Shirley Edwards and Evelyn Calcabrini, who were heading to north Wales where they wanted to stay for six months to improve their Welsh, were refused entry to the UK when they arrived at Heathrow.

Woolas again:

"We have to have robust rules and English language for entry. I think there is a consensus in the House – there wasn’t five years ago but there is now – that it is a desirable requirement for people who wish to emigrate to our country."

I may be picking up the wrong end of the stick but there is surely a difference between permanent immigration to the UK and wishing to study here for a degree or diploma course? Pre 9/11 the main barrier stopping foreign students getting into universities in the US was the dreaded TOEFL exam, a test of the applicant's grasp of academic English. Quite often the American institutions (and immigration authorities) demanded a higher level of English knowledge than that possessed by the average "native" student, but overall it is was a sensible approach- if you are proposing to study in a foreign country then you should be able to prove that you can at least cope with the language your course will be taught in. Which brings us back to the case of the *Patagonian Two*.

The onus of proof should be on the student that they are intending to study (e.g. proof of college or university acceptance), return home afterwards (return ticket) and that they have a base competence in the language they are wishing to study. If that evidence exists, then I can't see, from a practical point of view, why an intermediate level of English is also necessarily required for Patagonian students coming to the UK to study the Welsh language, presumably in the medium of that language. Incidentally, Argentinians tourists do not need visas to visit the UK which makes the original decision to send home Edwards and Calcabrini seem even more baffling and arbitrary.