Changes to immigration rules announced by Starmer

This 10 Year period, which looks to be retrospective in application, looks more like CH or Japan. These are countries with very tough migration systems. They are extremely picky on residency. I would also not describe them as multicultural by design in terms of who they allow in.

I don’t want to chase higher earners out and think Starmer is a fool for going there.

I agree on Aus style system. Watching people grapple with getting there is self defeating for us. If we vote it in it’ll never be voted out. Not even by the left.

If we're sending half of our young people to University but can not fill the highly skilled jobs or low paid jobs, and have a really low growth economy, then something is truly rotten in the state of Denmark.

If you pay your way that’s fine. if you get a council house and top up benefits absolutely not. Feel free to leave as our country it is far too overpopulated anyway. We need about 10 million less people here. I know high earners who’ve based themselves abroad for tax and young professionals with good degrees should leave this mess of a country for Australia or New Zealand. I don’t think we’ll have much of a country left in 20 years if government doesn’t get a grip and stop being woke. In a way we have been invaded some parts of this country you rarely see British people or British businesses on their high street. It’s been far too quick and it’s not integration if they don’t adopt our customs and values and just take over areas and speak their own language.

a Australia style system would be great and deal with asylum seekers exactly the same way they did (but they’d be an outcry here if we did).

Fair question.

I can’t believe Starmer did the I’ll smash the gangs I really will stuff pre GE. How did he get it so wrong? He’s meant to know this stuff surely.

I also recall posters claiming immigration topic was over etc how did their advisors get it that wrong.

He might try to do something else but he’ll need mandate for something that would work, which I expect the other parties will ask for at next GE.

100%

And making sure that skill visas are only issued for jobs which are unable to be filled by UK citizens.

There needs to be stronger vetting and more stringent follow up on visas issued vs where these people are and what they are actually doing!

You’re not alone in thinking that. Labour have been keen to chase higher earners out, presumably due to some supporters wanting the same.

Yes it’s going to be that exactly. But governments can change immigration rules freely and lawfully. Anyone in this system could find it changed which is why you want to nail down citizenship pdq and not be content with ILR. ILR is a very malleable legal status in the UK.

Yes @TheHouseofGirthi think this is nonsense. I think that the white paper refers to the position being 5-10 years on a sliding scale. I’d hope in your case it remains at 5 years. Whereas I’d hope that someone whose contribution is less clear (less tax paid, less English, concerns raised by agencies, long term medical conditions - Australia and NZ will screen people) would be at 10 years or not at all.

I am a high level taxpayer, as is my DH, and the rules are being changed for us, and the many taxpaying migrants.
I would rather cut my hand off than take benefits. I would sooner leave.

@TheHouseofGirthi think there should be no change for higher level taxpayers as it clearly isn’t in anyone’s interests, but honestly, if you’ve come over on a visa to work in a care home for five years and have no intention of continuing to work as a carer and are likely to claim benefits or if you’ve used a university visa as a way to try to buy citizenship, I honestly don’t think that the British state can afford to honour any promise you think you’ve been made.

Golden visas and citizenship schemes don't change the rules halfway through the scheme, leaving those of us who have followed all the rules floundering.
While those who gamed the rules were allowed in.

And @ironyisnotlost24if you look at citizenship schemes and golden visas for other countries, it’s a six figure sum.

Yes, exactly- this mindset totally changes the outside perception of the UK i.e one that is hostile to everyone not born here!

Economically Inactive? So SAHM's, Students, long term sick, early retirees, carers, the 16 to 18 age group... only the long term sick will be on benefits, which you think will be suitable for a benefit cut!

Good luck getting people who don't need to work, to take a job in Social Care, especially as many of these roles require the carer to have their own car.

Anyone living rurally will also require a car for any other jobs you want to force them to take.

@ironyisnotlost24far too cheap, because assuming you can get ILR in 5 years, that is the British state assuming responsibility for you and your family forever regardless of your ongoing contribution

Do you think it’s too expensive or cheap?

The £4K per person is for 2.5 years, then you pay your usual income tax and NIC on top.

Plus VAT, council tax and all the usual living expenses/contributions to society.

There will be special questions on the third conditional and the past perfect continuous tense on arrival.

That’ll smash them.

@Rewis

"How will these rules stop gangs and illegal immigration"

No rules will stop illegal migration because by definition it is illegal.

Al you can do to reduce illegal migration is deter (making the UK a less attractive destination), detect (eg find out who the smuggling gangs and try and make it harder for them) and deport (failed asylum seekers).

How will these rules stop gangs and illegal immigration? Like, the gang members are care workers or their university degrees are only undergraduate? Now they won't be able to enter?

I haven't read the full thread but I need to rant. This will cause skilled workes to go elsewhere. British citizens with foreign partners to relocate. I have a British partner and I can't get a visa to join him, we are doing LDR until we find a solution. Same with a lot of british-foreign couples who have met at work elsewhere. Partner works for the NHS, I have british qualifications from UK university and have 10 years experience in public healthcare. Due to legalities of partners job, we would like to be in UK. Since I'm now undesirable immigrant, we need to look eslewhere. Maybe Ireland, maybe somewhere else in EU until they will make everything stricter to UK citizens as way to counter these rules.

I can’t see that voters will have a massive issue with making people work somehow!

@nearlylovemyusername

"I agree, but how do you make 25% of working age population who are economically inactive to join labour market and actually make an effort to work? The moment government start talking about benefits review the public shouts about cruelty etc"

Unfortunately it's a political fact that voters that become £10 worse off are always more vocal than voters that become £10 better off.

I think it's fair to say that having 1 in 4 of the working age population as economically inactive (with many on some form of benefits) is economically unviable.

There are effectively two levers to get them back in to work.
A) cut their benefits which is will not play well with many voters or
B) increase the pay of care home workers which will result in a combination of lower profits for their employers but also higher fees.

Or a combination of both. But it's a trade off between the political impact and the economic impact.

Lol. Do you think us highly educated high earning migrants who can pay our way will stick around for 10 years to get ILR/ citizenship when we can move to countries that have lower taxes and don't keep changing rules every few years?
No.

Good luck running the country with 9 m on benefits and no high tax payers left.