18
S TAT E M E N T
I N T R O D U C T I O N
As you may be aware, on 11 October 2016 the Home Office announced, without warning, that the HPA could not grant endorsements of Points Based System (PBS)
sponsorships for the 2017 season until further notice.Since then,the HPA has been attempting to resolve the situation through negotiation and discussion.However,
by December 2016 the HPA took the view that given the increasing time pressure of the situation and the absence of any satisfactory response from the Home Office,
the HPA should instruct its solicitors to advise on alternative ways to reach a solution. Whilst discussions were still ongoing with the Home Office, the HPA took the
view that it might not advance our ultimate aim if it were to issue a public statement or respond to issues raised on social media. Given the Home Office’s continuing
refusal to lift the suspension on the HPA’s ability to grant endorsements and the inevitable impact on polo at all levels in the 2017 season, proceedings were issued
10 January against the Secretary of State. Set out below is a summary of the current position and the HPA will keep you updated with news of any developments.
O V E R V I E W
On 11 October 2016 the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) suspended the HPA’s endorsement criteria, with the effect that no endorsement of PBS
sponsorships may be issued by the HPA and no migrants could apply for entry clearance or leave to remain in the UK under PBS sponsorship to participate in the
sport of polo.
Negotiations were unproductive and despite repeated reminders about the time sensitivity of resolving the issue, the SSHD did not confirmwhen she
would reach a decision.
Any application to judicially review the SSHD’s decision must be issued within 3 months of the effective decision being communicated to
the HPA.The ‘effective decision’ for these purposes was the email of 11 October suspending the HPA’s power to provide endorsements.The deadline for the issue of
proceedings was therefore 10 January 2017.Following advice from Leading Counsel on the merits of the application,proceedings were drafted 10 January.
Given the
time pressure, the HPA’s advisers requested an urgent hearing on interim relief within 14 days of 10 January’s issue of proceedings. The interim relief was that the
HPA was free to grant endorsements under the current criteria, or in the alternative allow endorsements under the amended criteria (so far as they could be
understood at that time).
Set out below is some of the background so that you may understand why the HPA decided it had no other option but to issue proceedings.
T O A L L M E M B E R S O F T H E H PA
V I S A U P D AT E A S AT 3 0 J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 7
C H R O N O L O G Y
• In July 2015 Mr Lee Beach, Senior Operational Policy Advisor within the Immigration and Border Policy Directorate, met with the HPA to discuss whether the
endorsement criteria for polo remained fit for purpose and relevant.
• Following that meeting, Mr Beach highlighted concerns as to the operation of the endorsement criteria and asked that the HPA revert to him by 11 August 2015.
• On 10 August 2015 we responded in detail to his concerns.
• By email dated 19 August 2015 Mr Beach responded that it should be “business as usual” as far as the HPA was concerned. In light of the concerns that had been
raised, the HPA nevertheless thought it proper to continue discussions with the Home Office to ensure that everything was in order for the following season. On
3 December 2015 the HPA contacted Mr Beach indicating that a working group had been set up and suggested that there should be a meeting in March/April 2016
with Mr Beach with a view to finalising the endorsement criteria for the 2017 season. Mr Beach did not respond or take up the invitation.
• However, without any warning or prior indication, on 22 September 2016 Mr Beach contacted the HPA to notify it of the need to discuss the endorsement criteria
based on the Home Office’s decision to suspend the sponsor licences of a number of sponsors previously endorsed by the HPA. On 7 October 2016 a meeting took
place between David Woodd and Oliver Hughes, for the HPA, and Lee Beach and Ragnar Clifford (of the Immigration and Policy Directorate).
• By email dated 11 October 2016 Mr Beach wrote to the HPA with detailed and substantial proposed amendments to the endorsement criteria which would in our
view have had a detrimental impact on polo at all levels within the United Kingdom.The proposed new criteria were also ambiguous and unclear and needed further
discussion and clarification.That email also suspended the HPA’s ability to grant any further endorsements until further notice.
• On 11 November 2016 a further meeting took place between the parties.The HPA set out in detail why the proposed criteria in their current form were unworkable
for polo in the UK and that even if changes were to be brought in there would have to be a reasonable period to source and train up staff to replace those who would
be excluded under the proposed changes. It was agreed that the HPA would make formal representations, including the provision of evidence, to ensure that the
proposed new criteria were appropriate.
