Trans Green Party candidate with no British visa elected to Holyrood

[IwantToRetire]

Q Manivannan, who identifies as non-binary, was elected as an MSP on the Edinburgh & Lothians East list for the pro-independence Scottish Greens.

It was reported earlier this week that the former PhD student has appealed to colleagues for £2,089 of funding for a temporary graduate visa.

This would give the anthropologist and poet a further three years to work and live in the UK, picking up the taxpayer-funded MSP salary of £77,711.

Manivannan is said to have told colleagues this would help buy time to save up the £5,047 cost of applying for a global talent visa, the UK immigration category for promising individuals in specific sectors.

The self-described “queer Tamil immigrant” was only able to stand in the election after SNP ministers loosened the rules over who could be a Holyrood candidate.

Full article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/09/trans-green-party-candidate-migrant-elected-holyrood/
And at https://archive.is/LhZYy

Reform couldn't have dreamed for a better headline!

I thought they could claim Asylum Support, about £50 a week, if that's not public funds, where's it coming from.

As I said before 'Public Funds' are defined in the Immigration Rules are are basically mainstream benefits. Asylum Support is a separate category of benefit that is created by the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. Yes it is paid for by the UK Government, but no it is not 'Public Funds' because asylum seekers have No Recourse to Public Funds. (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9790/)

@SummerFeverVenice seems to think my wondering whether Q has the right to work is either anti-immigrant or anti-Q and it is in fact neither. I just know enough about immigration law, policy and practice to understand if someone says that they have NRPF, are a former student but they are not in paid employment they may be on a graduate visa but they may also be overstaying on a student visa or have lodged an asylum claim (not unlikely if you are a transexual Tamil from India). Of the three immigration statuses only a graduate visa would allow the holder to take on a full-time role.

Well if it is government funded, it surely is public funds. The rest is just semantics.

Agreed, more government fudging, if the government is paying it, it has to come from public purse because that's the only money a government has.
If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's public funds.

I don't necessarily disagree @TheywontletmehavethenameIwant and @murasaki, but my point is that No Recourse to Public Funds has a particular meaning in law and it does apply to asylum seekers, whereas @SummerFeverVenice said that I was wrong to say so.

Yes, you are correct. But the funding is still from public money, even if not categorised in the same way. Obfuscation from the state (not you!) At its finest.

Mridul Wadhwa was also on the list further down

Well that was a luck escape! What if the Scottish Greens had had a told landslide.

Not just Dr Q but Wadhwa as well.

My non Scottish half is thinking not sure I trust this system of voting.

I know votes are based on Parties - ie giving a sort of list of political priorities, but surely it is also relevant who you are as a person.

Also want to agre with those who point out it is more than a little arrogant to think that you can represent people when you have only had any reall connection with them for a few years while you are studying.

But maybe this will be the era of international politics, where the righeous, eg green non binaries can land in an area foreign to them but be convinced they have the right analysis to govern.

Hold on a moment - isn't that a bit like all those white Christians who decided their world view and values meant they were entitled to govern in countries they knew nothing about and had any connection to?

Have now read this https://electoral-reform.org.uk/how-scotlands-holyrood-elections-work-will-work-this-may/

So those on a list vote dont represent a single constiuency but a Region.

Or do they not have to represent anyone? In which case shouldn't they be paid less than the constituency representative MSP? As they are only doing half the job?

They do the shame job, except that they're answerable to a region rather than a constiuency: Jenny Gilruth is my constituency MSP, but I can also contact several regional (Mid-Scotland and Fife) MSPs.

Last parliament, I found that the Tory list MSPs were the quickest to respond, followed by Labour and the one Green at that time. I think there was a LibDem as well. Gilruth didn't reply at all.

I did not vote for her this time.

He is neither non-binary (as there is no such thing) nor a woman of any kind

Him. His sex is known. It's male

"And I don't see why people should be bothered by her getting paid for doing a job, plenty of people on visas do that and presumably she's going to get a visa in order to that"

Sorry, I haven't RTFT so I apologise if this has already been raised.

The problem is that he doesn't have a visa that allows him to remain in the country indefinitely - he doesn't have ILR.

Scotland changed their rules last year (Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Act 2025) so that people like him can stand as candidates. Fair enough, Scotland is entitled to do as many outlandish things (from my point of view) as they want to.

He could apply for a Skilled Worker Visa or a Global Talent Visa.

However, MSPs do not meet the rules for a Skilled Worker Visa.

He is trying to apply for a Global Talent Visa but these need an accredited sponsor and neither the Scottish Parliament nor the Scottish Green Party are accredited as such so it is not likely to succeed (and, quite frankly, these types of visas are really aimed at people at the very top of their field globally, not really party activists with new PhDs).

So they will have to apply outside the rules and hope an exception is granted, which can happen but is not guaranteed.

Meanwhile Holyrood has no recall procedure and no minimum attendance requirements.

All coming together to mean it is perfectly possible that the new MSP will be refused leave to remain, have to leave the country, continue to receive £77k per year until the end of the term and leave the Scottish Greens down a seat in the chamber.

Which is a mess and so typical of the Scottish Greens. It looks like the crowdfunder wasn't started until last week either, suggesting no one in the party had realised there was a potential issue here.

The link is referring to both asylum seekers and immigrants. Asylum seekers are supported by public funds both while their applications are being processed and if they are awarded a refugee visa,

An immigrant with NRPF is going to be an immigrant on a student, graduate, skilled worker, or family visa.

I didn’t say you were wrong per se, but mistaken to believe that NRPF is an indication of no right to work, it is the exact opposite as most visas with a right to work do stipulate NRPF because the immigrant is expected to support him or herself.

@ScotiaLass
I just know enough about immigration law, policy and practice to understand if someone says that they have NRPF, are a former student but they are not in paid employment they may be on a graduate visa but they may also be overstaying on a student visa or have lodged an asylum claim (not unlikely if you are a transexual Tamil from India). Of the three immigration statuses only a graduate visa would allow the holder to take on a full-time role.

A student visa allows full time work under limited circumstances, I posted the guidance unthread in this. For example for up to four months after studies are completed but the student visa is still valid, a former student can legally work full time. A student can also legally work full time during holiday periods, the set term breaks if undergraduate or by written confirmation of their degree/thesis supervisor that they are on a vacation if postgraduate/doctorate level.

From full report
An NRPF condition is mandatory for most types of immigration permission.
For example, a Skilled Worker or Student visa cannot be granted with access
to public funds.

From full report, once an asylum seeker is granted asylum, they receive a refugee visa which does grant them access to public funds.

”Who does have recourse to public funds?
Other groups of migrants fall outside the NRPF rules. These include:

• People with EU settled or pre-settled status, although the latter may
need to show they have an EU law right of residence or invoke the EU
Charter of Fundamental Rights to access benefits

• People with refugee status, although the government has the power to
impose the NRPF condition on some refugees

• People with indefinite leave to remain, except adult dependent relatives”

Yep, it’s public funds.

All coming together to mean it is perfectly possible that the new MSP will be refused leave to remain, have to leave the country, continue to receive £77k per year until the end of the term and leave the Scottish Greens down a seat in the chamber.

Doubtful this would happen. Q will essentially be applying for a graduate visa showing a job offer in the amount of £77k/yr which is more than double the minimum financial requirement. The graduate visa will be approved, and Q will have 3 years to accumulate the experience and time towards applying for skilled worker visa and then, later, ILR.

Hold on a moment. What is this talk of immigrantion.

He may just want temporary residency.

Much like the white Christians who did their duty by serving a few years on behalf of the Church in "alien" countries.

In fact he now has a basis for temporary residency as he has secured a paid job for 5 years.

And done it without any qualifications!

I know votes are based on Parties - ie giving a sort of list of political priorities, but surely it is also relevant who you are as a person.

Yup. And people like Maggie Chapman get put at the top of their regional list and then are very hard to vote out.

Some, like Lorna Slater and Kate Nevens, are on both the constituency and regional lists - I don't see why that is allowed.

True, but being an MSP is 5 year commitment, not a holiday job.

I also didn't say that refugees have no recourse to public funds. I said that asylum seekers have no recourse to public funds. Once an asylum seeker is granted refugee status or another form of leave to remain their legal status changes and they are no longer an asylum seeker and so have different rights and entitlements. I suppose you are right that Q could have been granted refugee status already, but given what he said about his situation when I heard him speak I judged that to be unlikely.

My point stands that based on how Q described his status and how he came to be in Scotland I wondered if he had the right to work. It turns out I was correct to make that observation because they've now got a visa issue to sort out.

I agree that it's highly likely that he'll get a graduate visa or a highly skilled worker visa. Even if he did have to leave the country (which is unlikely) I expect the Greens would talk him into stepping down as an MSP so the next person on the list could replace them.

Immigration doesn't need to be permanent. Anything beyond a holiday counts as immigration in terms of the law and national statistics.

What? I have never said they are a refugee who came as an asylum seeker, why are you saying I may be right that they’re a refugee?

The facts are they are here legally on a British student visa. That they have completed their studies so are eligible to work full time for up to four months or until their student visa expires whichever comes first. During this time, they can apply for a graduate visa and graduate jobs like stand for election. The MSP job they got has a salary that more than meets the financial requirement for graduate visa approval. Afaik, they have no criminal record or other background that would make them otherwise ineligible for a graduate visa.

It’s not a visa “issue” because all British visas are temporary. It is normal that a student will then apply for a graduate visa and then apply for skilled worker and then apply for ILR and then apply for citizenship. That is the normal progression. It’s not an issue to sort out any more than having to tell DVLA you have a new address means you have a driving licensing issue to sort out.

The only immigrant status that isn’t temporary is indefinite leave to remain which takes 10yrs to achieve for most immigrants.

WTF? No qualifications? Dr Q has no qualifications? They are actually more qualified than most of our Prime Ministers.

Starmer only got as far as a Bachelor of Civil Law (BCL)

All his other degrees are honorary meaning he didn’t do any studying or learning to earn them.

Boris Johnson, second class BA in Classics
Theresa May BA in Geography
David Cameron BA in PPE
Liz Truss BA in PPE
Rishi Sunak MBA

But a PhD is unqualified? You are being ridiculous.

Gilruth is my constituency MSP too.

'Gilruth didn't reply at all.'

Not remotely surprised.