The repose is brutally honest. As it should be. YoutubeTens of thousands of Gurkhas will be refused the right to settle in Britain despite a landmark court ruling, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Only certain categories of veterans, including the bravest or seriously injured, will be allowed to come and stay after the Home Office ruled out a blanket policy, amid fears it would lead to up to 100,000 veterans and their dependants wanting to come.
The move will infuriate the Gurkhas and supporters, including actress Joanna Lumley, who thought they had won a long fought battle last year.
Immigration minister Phil Woolas will respond to a High Court decision which concluded that rules which stopped Gurkhas who served before July 1997 from settling in Britain were illegal.
Campaigners celebrated the ruling last October as a "victory for fairness" and had hoped it meant up to 40,000 Gurkhas who had served before the cut off date would now be allowed to live here.
Currently only those who retired after July 1997, when the Gurkha base was moved from Hong Kong to England, could automatically stay in Britain.
But the Home Office will insist the judge did not say the principle of the cut-off date was unlawful, only the criteria surrounding those who could come.
It will publish revised criteria but it will stop well short of allowing all pre-1997 veterans from settling, Whitehall sources disclosed.
Instead the new policy will be "generous" to those who were honoured for bravery or valour, require medical care due to injuries suffered during service and those who served a lengthy period, which will be higher than the four year requirement currently in place for Gurkhas who joined after July 1997.
Veterans who had their applications for settlement put on hold pending the court case - believed to be around 1,100 - will also be looked on favourably.
The policy will lead to fewer than 10,000 Gurkhas being affected instead of nearly 40,000.
A source said: "The problem is it is not just the soldiers but their dependants as well.
"It was estimated that if there had been a blanket policy then it would have cost the country between £1.1 billion and £1.5 billion."
In October, Mr Justice Blake said it was "irrational'' that Gurkhas were denied residency while other foreign soldiers serving in the Army were allowed to settle.
Lawyers for the soldiers had argued Britain owed the Gurkhas a "special debt'' of gratitude for their brave service, during which 50,000 have been killed and 13 have won Victoria Crosses.
As for myself, if Britain's civil service and it's government persists in this action. I suggest we offer settlement here. Since the end of the Cold War and in many points before, wherever the US military was, the British military was there also. While serving the dictates of the British government Gurkha soldiers have been also fighting for our interests and well being. Bluntly I would rather have them here then a good number of my current fellow citizens.
