AN American man living in the Highlands with his Scottish wife and daughter – and who is at the centre of a visa battle with the Home Office – says nothing will change until Scotland is independent and able to decide its own immigration policy.
Scott Johnson was speaking as Jason and Christy Zielsdorf and their five children were thought to be heading back to Canada after giving up their community lifeline store in Laggan, and as Russell Felber and his lawyer attended a hearing in Edinburgh to put to a judge his and his wife’s case to remain in Inverness.
Johnson – who lives near Tain, Ross-shire with wife Nicola and Lauryn, their daughter – has been battling to remain in Scotland since the family arrived back here two years ago. He is currently awaiting a decision on whether or not he can appeal against the refusal of his leave to remain.
He told The National: “I feel real heavy in my heart at what’s happening to all these people and I feel like I’m the next one on the plank. But I’m never going to allow it to come down to that. I won’t let that happen to my family.
“I think it warps people, it warps children and I won’t allow it to happen, I have my family to think about. I don’t think anything is going to change until this country has independence and can decide who stays here. It’s like it doesn’t matter what happens to Canadians, or Australians – whatever Westminster says is what’s going to happen.”
Dr Paul Monaghan took up the Johnsons’ case with Immigration Minister Robert Goodwill.
He wrote to him after they had discussed it at Westminster and after UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) had suggested that family move to the US.
In his letter he set out in detail the steps Johnson had taken to formalise his stay in Scotland, adding: “Mr and Mrs Johnson have no desire to live in the United States and furthermore wish for their daughter, who is settled in school and the local community, to grow up in the country of her birth. I find it completely unacceptable that UKVI would argue that residents of Scotland should move to the United States for no good reason and attempt to justify that argument on an incorrect conclusion based upon a cursory examination of the case facts.
“Mr Johnson is a qualified teacher, he is an active member of his local rural community, and he is more than able to support himself and his family financially. He is an example of the positives of immigration… and I am at a loss to explain why your department cannot simply review the circumstances of the case and come to a reasonable judgement based on the objective facts.”
Monaghan told The National: “Robert Goodwill obviously hasn’t bothered reading my letter – he’s just given it to a civil servant who has gone to UKVI and we get the same reply back. We’ve had this reply before and it’s outrageous to suggest that the couple were never married. It’s obvious that they were, it’s obvious they were in a co-habiting and subsisting relationship. All of the facts are completely ignored.
“Part of the problem is the UKVI service changes the rules on a weekly basis. The bottom line is that nobody knows actually what the rules are because they are changing so frequently and being updated.
“I have other constituents who have links to Romania who have been given forms and then been told by UKVI that the forms are not valid because they were changed the previous week, despite the fact the couple received the forms from UKVI the week before that.”
In the letter signed by Goodwill, he referred to the heart attack Johnson suffered when he arrived in Glasgow in May 2015. The fact that he applied to remain from inside the UK was cited as one reason for the rejection of the application.
Goodwill wrote: “I am sorry to hear that Mr Johnson suffered a heart attack but the Home Office refusal letter explains that America has a health care system which Mr Johnson can gain access too [sic] if he requires further cardiology care… In light of the above, I do not thnk [sic] a meeting would be helpful at this stage.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel