Now let them stay! Humiliating defeat for Brown forces rethink over Gurkhas... but news comes too late for one hero

• 'Elation' as furious MPs turn on Government over its betrayal of veterans
• 
  
• But sadness for the 'exemplary' Gurkha who died without knowing he had won his last battle

Gordon Brown is under overwhelming pressure to scrap 'offensive' rules barring Gurkhas from Britain after Labour rebels dealt him a crushing Commons defeat.

He paid a heavy price for attempting to introduce guidelines preventing thousands of veterans who had risked their lives for this country settling here with their families.

In a sign of his faltering authority, a total of 27 Labour MPs rebelled, including a ministerial aide who quit. Following a heated two-hour debate called by the Lib Dems, MPs voted to scrap the rules by 267 to 246.

The result was symbolic as it is not binding on the Government. But it sent out an unmistakable message to Mr Brown that he urgently needs to rethink the Home Office guidelines amidst widespread public anger.

The result was announced amid shouts for Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, who is responsible for immigration rules, to resign.

The Labour rebels included Home Affairs Select Committee chairman Keith Vaz, ministerial aide Stephen Pound and former cabinet minister Andrew Smith.

Mr Pound said he had resigned as a parliamentary private secretary in the Department for Work and Pensions to vote against the Government.

As many as 75 Labour MPs were understood to have abstained in a further sign of the Prime Minister's diminishing authority. This took the total number of Labour members who failed to vote with the Government to over 100.

In an emergency statement to the Commons last night, Immigration Minister Phil Woolas said 1,350 outstanding applications by Gurkhas to stay in the UK would be determined by the end of May.

He said proposals to reform the rules would be published before the summer break in July.

The High Court last year declared that preventing Gurkhas who had served in the Army before 1997 from living in the UK was unlawful.

Last Friday the Government came up with a new set of rules which campaigners said would allow only 100 veterans who were war heroes or badly injured to live in Britain.

Yesterday's vote brought cheers from 1,000 Gurkhas who had gathered outside Parliament.


Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg and Tory leader David Cameron joined actress Joanna Lumley, who had campaigned on behalf of the Gurkhas, as she held aloft the regiment's distinctive Kukri knife in victory.

Mr Clegg, who had secured the emergency debate championing the Gurkhas' cause, said: 'This is a great, great day for everyone who believes in fairness and decency in this country.

'This is the kind of thing that I think people want this country to do - pay back our obligations and our debt of gratitude to generations of Gurkhas who laid down their lives for this country. People who are willing to die for our country should be allowed to live in our country.'

Earlier, Mr Clegg had torn into Mr Brown during Prime Minister's Questions, accusing him of 'doing a shameful thing' but not having 'the guts to admit it or change it'. He said it was symptomatic of a leader with 'no principles and no courage.'

The complex new guidelines state that Gurkha veterans who retired from the British Army before 1997 can stay only if they can prove a sufficiently 'strong connection' with the country.

The case must be made through bravery medals, combat injuries or serving at least 20 years, although soldiers from other Commonwealth countries can apply for UK residency after just four years in the Army.

The Government says about 6,000 Gurkhas and their family members have already been allowed to come to Britain under changes since 1997. The new guidance will allow in a further 10,000, including dependants, ministers argue.

Mr Brown claimed that axing the rules would open the door to 100,000 Gurkhas and their dependants, costing the taxpayer £1.4billion. But representatives of the Gurkhas believe that even if the rules are axed completely, no more than 6,000 would want to move to Britain.

Using Government figures, this would cost the country £230million - less than half of the £540million wrongly paid to Income Support and Jobseeker's Allowance claimants last year.

Furious MPs from all parties turned on the Government over their 'betrayal' of the veterans.

LibDem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: 'We can play the numbers game, and if we do the Government will lose the argument because its figures, frankly, are fantasy.

'But the numbers are not the point. The point is a simple one. It is that Gurkhas have given an unconditional commitment to this country. They have put their lives on the line for us time and again.'

Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green said: 'The underlying reason why the Government is having to behave in such an unfair and ungenerous way to this group of people is that its overall immigration policy has been out of control for so many years.

'It boils down to this. Why are they trying to stop Gurkhas coming here? Because they have failed to stop so many much less deserving people from coming here - and what is worse, staying here.'

Mr Cameron said: 'Today is a historic day when Parliament took the right decision. The Government now have got to come back with immediate proposals.

'Gordon Brown has misjudged the mood of the public about the Gurkhas. The Government has been in power for a long time and has lost touch with public opinion.'

Miss Lumley, whose late father Major James Rutherford Lumley served with the 6th Gurkha Rifles, said she and everyone involved in the campaign were 'elated'.

'Just before this vote was taken our spirits were nearly at zero,' she said.

'When it came through I can't tell you the sense of elation, the sense of pride - pride in our country, pride in the democratic system and pride in our Parliament.' continues here

So what do you think, should the Gurkhas come here, so many voices cry out in support all citing bravery as reason, so what is your view, surely in times past they fought alongside us but didn’t others, are we to permit the influx of mass non-whites merely because at one time or another we fought together, in that case lets bring in the world, lets sink Britannia under a sea of wriggling brown bodies.

Nepal is a poor country, four in ten live in poverty and the income received from salaries and pensions paid by the British government is vital to some families and tribes, moreover, available places for military personnel are limited and highly oversubscribed, many rather crestfallen young men must return to the hills empty handed. We see from this, that rather than bravery or patriotism the initial motivation is purely financial, there can be no doubt that at certain times the Gurkhas have acted bravely, many beyond the call of duty, yet individual valour occurs across all sections of society.

Many individuals of all races and creeds display courage, bravery, what makes the Gurkha any different, after all shouldn’t we questioning our exploitation of these people rather than shipping them in to further erode our resources. They fought one must remember, not for the flag but for the money, the complete reverse of why most of our own youth enter the services, many motivated by patriotism, although poverty amongst the working classes plays its part. Hopefully the working class has learned its lesson and it will never again fight or bear arms for tyranny, though I fear this is a wish rather than a statement of truth.

It is my view that the Ghurkhas warrant no special treatment, that they as with others only wish to comer here to escape their own countries failings, again perhaps a building up of infrastructure, rather than importing a problem may be the answer. We have no room, we face the impending danger of extinction and yet still we bring in more, still we the people, let them seal our fate. So no, much as I admire and respect their proud history, much as I comprehend the many occasions of bravery, I still after all, can not sanction the importation of alien elements into the country, all again hell-bent on availing themselves of our resources, so what do you think?

Related Posts by Categories