NHS Doctors refused evacuation from Sudan by British Government - DISGUSTING!

[Raggletagglegypsy]

Shameful and shocking that NHS doctors should be turned away from evacuation flights from Sudan, simply because they have British residency, but are not British nationals. Just watching Newsnight on catchup and I was so enraged that I couldn't keep watching. I really hope that this matter has been put right since Newsnight aired yesterday. A medic who served the British people at Manchester Royal Infirmary through the pandemic was escorted out of the airport where he had arrived for evacuation, wanting to return to his work as a registrar. There are apparently over 20 doctors known to be in a similar position (having visited families for Eid - many with young children). The doctor who was interviewed described the situation as "disappointing" - I would use stronger vocabulary.
WE SHOULD ALL BE RAISING THIS WITH OUR MPs TODAY!

This is the issue! Not doctors being treated more favourably. When the chips are down we are abandoning them. Horrendous!

Yes, I agree entirely with your sentiments. Their specific occupation is irrelevant, to a degree. I suppose I focused on doctors because I was reacting to the immediate impact of the interview I was watching with one. But of course, it should apply to anyone who, up until that point, was making a life in the UK and would have been about to return here to resume that life.

Not true. Civil service are presenting options to ministers and it is ministers making the decisions. Civil servants do not make decisions like this.

Visiting family for Eid in a very unstable warzone place with a high level of contact is a big risk. Just like someone insisting on going into Ukraine to see family for Christmas. Yes, it is nice to be with your family for big holidays but it isn't always possible or the best decision.

I feel for the people who live there but for those who decided the risk was worth a visit in the middle of this conflict - this is exactly why it was a risk. Taking a risk doesn't always pay off.

Absolutely agree. It seems insane that they’ll get out a British national who hasn’t lived in the UK for decades, but not someone who has lived and worked and built a family here for the most of their life.

By that logic, you would be rescuing nobody. I am not sure that is an ethical path we should be treading.

There has to be a legal process in place.

If our government include all those with leave to remain in the UK in the evacuation, then they will have to evacuate all of those. It started of as British passport holders only - again, something that can be verified with metric data before people board a flight.

Anyone having a work permit in the UK - what does that actually mean? How many people are there in that position in Sudan right now? How can the government distinguish between the value of doctors or hospital cleaners, for example? They will get even more stick for that.

However, yes I agree on a moral level. These poor people caught in this terrible conflict. I hope they get out safely and that our government do help.

The NHS has huge schemes in place and invests a fair bit in overseas recruitment, people are often approached abroad and sold the dream (read: nightmare). Whilst people choose to move, they are handheld by the NHS and for many this is what persuades then to come over. To then say nah fuck you is horrible.

I hope there will be an urgent question raised in the House of Commons today. It is shameful behaviour from our Government,

That's ethical view but afaik all embassies always start with their own unless they have agreement like some EU countries did now to get their respective citizens out.
Yes, it probably should include residents as well, it would be ethically right probably, but practically it's always own embassy.
I always checked when going somewhere. I would get lifted back to my native country, not to UK.

@Intergalacticcatharsis Apparently many of the doctors in question have biometric residence permits - so of course they could easily be checked - just as they would have been checked and permitted entry when they returned from their trip, had this not happened.

I think your post is really problematic OP. Are there different grades of acceptable people to get out of Sudan? I totally disagree with you. If they are taking people out who are British citizens but not those with a residency permit then they shouldn't extend that to people with British residency (who by definition have another nationality) on the grounds of how useful they might be to the UK. That's an awful approach. These people are citizens of another country. If they UK had space and was able to get out other people, then maybe those with residency could be considered before those without, but still, not on the grounds of their job.

Plus they aren't NHS doctors, they are doctors who have worked for the NHS.

Doctors who are working for the NHS

Nope. Countries and political/economic blocks have agreements with each other.

The French were getting out any EU/EEA citizen and their families.

This meant a British woman was airlifted out by the French because her son is an EU (Irish) passport holder.

The UK if it was in the EU/EEA wouldn't have had to panic and block the runway for the Germans if we were in the EU.

I find it really disturbing that you have picked doctors. Loads of stories out there about people, including doctors, who just live in Sudan, but have lived in the UK.
I actually think that it'd be very nice if the UK could collect some of these people, but the priority should be British people who do not have an alternative embassy to turn to, they are just British, without any other options. After that, why not others, but NOT JUST DOCTORS. People matter, not their professions.

Exactly. There are some truly horrific people in this world.

It’s not unique to Britain. As a country we repatriate with Nationals first in the queue them work your way down to however many can safely be removed before you need to end the exit operation. I would think every country would take this approach? It would be an unusual approach to prioritise those with residency over Nationals. Trying to process a ‘queue’ on a skills based approach which uses subjective worthiness is never the way it will work given the obligations countries have to their Nationals, even if that National is an unemployed cleaner.

Basically, it's a "good immigrant" narrative, which I actually think is fairly racist. You can come back in, we'll rescue you, because you are useful. You are a doctor, let's get you on the flight, and write to an MP otherwise, if you aren't so valuable, we won't start posts on mumsnet about you.

Let's face it, the British government is messing things up again, starting the evacuation later than needed. They haven't got all the British citizens that want to leave out just yet, it's a mess, again.

I think it's not only that it wouldn't work, it'd be immoral to assess people on their usefulness to Britain before rescuing them.

I did explain elsewhere that I was just reacting to an interview that I watched on Newsnight that was focusing on doctors (I have been bogged down with a work deadline and have not had chance to be aware of all the details). But logically, yes, I agree that it should apply to all occupations etc. I think your accusation that I have taken a "disturbing" position is a little OTT...I simply posted in haste as a reaction to what I was watching on catchup. I agree my OP was too simplistic. But it does illustrate the fundamental injustice, which can then be rolled out to other cases.

I have a lot of sympathy with your argument on the grounds of humanity. But I'd be interested to know which of the British citizens you'd like the British troops to leave behind for the citizen of another country? If we had capacity to get all the British citizens out then we could think about who else we could get out too, but should we be leaving behind people who are British, and how will we decide that they are less worthy than an NHS doctor?

I would also point out that removing someone from Sudan who is a Sudanese citizen could put our citizens and troops at risk. At the moment they are able to operate the evacuations because they are removing our own citizens for safety under international law. If they start removing Sudanese citizens, no matter what the good reason, our planes become legitimate targets. This is a very different situation than Afghanistan (although I agree that was a shit show too) because there were formal agreements in place with the Taliban about the evacuation. There are no such agreements in place with the opposing forces in the Sudan, and there is no legitmate governmental power left to make or enforce such agreements.

Exactly. Why do people do this, travel to unstable places against advice and expect to be bailed out?

Are the French evacuating Sudanese nationals? Because that's what we're talking about.

I do agree that in this situation the UK government should use their discretion to evacuate Sudanese nationals who are UK residents, and their minor children.

YABVVU OP. The same rules have to apply to everyone, based on residency and not how important they are.
Based on what you said an NHS Doctor who's been in the UK less than 6 months can jump the queue over a cleaner/wedding planner/some other 'useless' profession who's been in the UK 5 years? Or worse, someone who's been heremost of their lives as a permanent resident?

having a 'visa' means that they aren't permanent residents. They should rightly be at the back of the queue behind those with indefinite leave to remain, unless 'everyone' with UK residency was being evacuated.

The narrative about 'service' is also stupid. They're doctors. And as most of those interviewed were Sudanese - as shit as the NHS is, I'm presuming it's a lot better than being a doctor in Sudan? A brit going to work in Sudan, with something like 'Doctors without borders' would be 'serving'. Not these people.

Also a visa holder, half my family are doctors. We all think this is ridiculous.