Ayo Gurkhali - the Gurkhas are coming

[Sheilbh]

Lumley joy as Gurkhas win total victory

By Jack Doyle and Tom Morgan, Press Association


Actress and Gurkha campaigner Joanna Lumley wipes a tear from her eye as she celebrates with retired Gurkha soldiers outside the Houses of Parliament

Oli Scarff/Getty Images

Actress and Gurkha campaigner Joanna Lumley wipes a tear from her eye as she celebrates with retired Gurkha soldiers outside the Houses of Parliament

    * Photos More pictures

Gurkha campaigner Joanna Lumley paid tribute to Prime Minister Gordon Brown today as she hailed the decision to allow all Gurkha veterans to come to Britain.

The move, announced in the Commons by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, means thousands of Gurkhas who retired before 1997 will be given settlement rights.

Lumley said: "I would like to pay tribute to Gordon Brown the Prime Minister, a brave man who has made today a brave decision on behalf of the bravest of the brave.

"A great injustice has been righted. The Gurkhas are coming home."

The changes will allow retired servicemen with four years service to move to this country, Ms Smith told the Commons.

She said: "Generations of Gurkhas have served the United Kingdom with great courage, sacrifice and distinction and they continue to make a vital and valued contribution to our operations around the world.

"We respect the will of the House of Commons on this issue and that is why I have now announced a new policy, the basis of which we have worked on with the Home Affairs Select Committee and Gurkha representatives.

"This means we can now welcome any Gurkha who has served for four years or more to settle in the UK."

The decision sparked jubilant scenes outside parliament as Lumley informed her fellow supporters that victory was complete.

The actress choked back tears as she thanked Mr Brown for making his "brave decision".

She then joined hundreds of former Gurkhas and supporters in screaming their famous battle cry "Ayo Gurkhali", meaning "the Gurkhas are coming".

Ms Lumley added: "This is a fantastic day for my brothers and sisters."

Flanked by supporters, she then joined in giving three cheers for the Prime Minister.

Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg, whose Commons motion led directly to the u-turn, said: "I am absolutely thrilled that the Gurkhas have finally been given justice.

"This is a great victory for the Gurkhas and for everyone who has campaigned on their behalf.

"Gordon Brown has finally woken up to the principle that people across Britain understand instinctively: if someone is prepared to die for this country, they must be allowed to live in it.

"Tragically this decision will come too late for many of those brave Gurkhas who have been waiting so long to see justice done.

"Gordon Brown's claim of a 'moral compass' rings hollow when, on every issue from Gurkhas to expenses, he has to be dragged every inch of the way towards doing the right thing."

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: "This has been a great victory for Joanna Lumley and her well-run campaign that has publicly embarrassed Ministers and has reminded us all of the role that the Gurkhas have played in helping defend this country over the centuries.

"First and foremost this case was about basic decency. People from around the world have come to live in this country in the past decade.

"There was never a justification to deny that right to a group of people who have long lived in the nation's affections, and who have risked and often given their lives for its protection.

"It is just a shame that the Government had to be dragged kicking and screaming through the courts and then through the crowds of Gurkhas outside parliament before it finally did the right thing."

Lumley was informed of the decision by the PM at breakfast talks today.

The Government U-turn followed a two-year campaign to get the same rights for pre-1997 Gurkhas as those who retired more recently.

They reacted with anger to new Home Office rules published last month which they said would allow only 100 more to move here.

Ministers were forced to reconsider the rules after they lost a Commons vote last month on a Liberal Democrat motion.

[Valmy]

Dang I thought a unit of Gurkhas was being sent to attack the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Anyway congrats to the Gurkha veterans.

[Sheilbh]

Dang I thought a unit of Gurkhas was being sent to attack the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The Gurkhas are already in Afghanistan, Prince Harry was with them when he was out there.  Apparently they're very useful because they're good at mountains and there's some cultural similarities with the Afghans

[grumbler]

The idea that a mere four years' service gains one the right to move to Britain is asinine.  That's merely one hitch, and the Army will get lots of volunteers just to get the benefit, not to fight for Britain.

Requiring at least one re-enlistment to qualify would reduce the number of people joining just for the benefit, and provide not only better soldiers, but better immigrants.

Limiting this to only "retired Gurkhas," as Lumley falsely implies they are doing, would probably be too much; you want at least some of them to be young enough to contribute to the National Health before they get old enough to need it extensively.

[Sheilbh]

The idea that a mere four years' service gains one the right to move to Britain is asinine.  That's merely one hitch, and the Army will get lots of volunteers just to get the benefit, not to fight for Britain.

The Army already gets around 3000 volunteers for the 150 places each year.  There may be a mercenary element to it.  Gurkhas retirement is more than the salary of a Nepalese cabinet minister.

Edit: Sorry, that's 20 000 applications for every 200 posts that are available each year.

Limiting this to only "retired Gurkhas," as Lumley falsely implies they are doing, would probably be too much; you want at least some of them to be young enough to contribute to the National Health before they get old enough to need it extensively.

The government gave the right to settlement, a few years back, to Gurkhas who joined after 1997.  This campaign is entirely about the retired Gurkhas who joined before 1997 receiving the same benefit.

[Josquius]

I must say I don't think well of Lumley for this one. Quite the fame grab.
Such a obvious case of right and wrong and one that was already moving forward.

The Gurkhas are already in Afghanistan, Prince Harry was with them when he was out there.  Apparently they're very useful because they're good at mountains and there's some cultural similarities with the Afghans

IIRC don't the gurkhas originally come from the Afghanistan are?
I'm sure there's some semi-legendary thing about them coming from that area and heading east into Nepal...

[Sheilbh]

I must say I don't think well of Lumley for this one. Quite the fame grab.

Her dad was a Gurkha officer.  This is a case when I can clearly see how emotional and family links could drive someone (even a celebrity) into campaigning mode

[grumbler]

The Army already gets around 3000 volunteers for the 150 places each year.  There may be a mercenary element to it.  Gurkhas retirement is more than the salary of a Nepalese cabinet minister.

Edit: Sorry, that's 20 000 applications for every 200 posts that are available each year.

Yes, which is why you don't need more incentives than already exist.  It therefor makes little sense to extend this as a reward for  the minimum.

The government gave the right to settlement, a few years back, to Gurkhas who joined after 1997.  This campaign is entirely about the retired Gurkhas who joined before 1997 receiving the same benefit.

Understood, but not relevant to  my point, which was that allowing Gurkhas to settle in Britain after a mere four years of service was counter-productive.

[Malthus]

Understood, but not relevant to  my point, which was that allowing Gurkhas to settle in Britain after a mere four years of service was counter-productive.

That may well be the case, but once the decision was made to offer the benefit to recent enlistees, it makes a certain amount of sense to offer the same to those already retired - strictly speaking they are not entitled to it as it was never an "inducement" offered to them and so they have no expectation of it, but this is definitely a case where equitable rather than legal principles apply; it simply does not sit well to withhold it.

[The Brain]

The idea that a mere four years' service gains one the right to move to Britain is asinine.  That's merely one hitch, and the Army will get lots of volunteers just to get the benefit, not to fight for Britain.

Requiring at least one re-enlistment to qualify would reduce the number of people joining just for the benefit, and provide not only better soldiers, but better immigrants.

Limiting this to only "retired Gurkhas," as Lumley falsely implies they are doing, would probably be too much; you want at least some of them to be young enough to contribute to the National Health before they get old enough to need it extensively.

Whoa talk about finding problems where there is none.

[Richard Hakluyt]

There is a potential problem here. The Gurkhas are mercenaries and are recruited by the army because they are cost-effective. They come from some of the poorest parts of Nepal, so despite costing less than a British recruit the rewards offered to them are princely by their local standards. Hence the vast numbers queing up for each recruit spot. In addition to this campaign for residence rights there have also been campaigns for equal pay and pension rights to other British soldiers. Thus their expense per man rises.

At some point the army may choose to no longer recruit, certainly most of the cost savings must have gone by now. On the other hand, competition for these prized posts is so intense that maybe, due to the high-quality of the recruits, the army will be able to carry on with recruiting Gurkhas.

[grumbler]

Whoa talk about finding problems where there is none.

Whoa talk about finding problems where there are none.

[Sheilbh]

Understood, but not relevant to  my point, which was that allowing Gurkhas to settle in Britain after a mere four years of service was counter-productive.

Well it does indicate that this campaign has just been about retired Gurkhas.  The fight over existing and future Gurkhas has already been won.  If anything I think it's perverse that the government's position was that those who sign up for four years in 1997 are able to live in the UK while those who signed up before, regardless of length of service weren't.

Also the pension and other benefits are tied - as with all soldiers - to the length of service.

The governments figures of the potential cost (around £1.5 billion) is based on every single Gurkha and ex-Gurkha coming to the UK, bringing a dependant, neither them nor their dependant working, claiming all benefits a person can claim at once and being ill.

[Martinus]

Whoa talk about grumbler being a retarded asshole.

[Queequeg]

The Ghurkas use a variety of the Greco-Bactrian/Indo-Greek/Indo-Scythian calendar and some of their weapons have roots in the period, and are thus fantastically awesome.    Good for them.