Reform plans to scrap indefinite leave to remain for migrants

[Twiglets1]

BBC report following Farage's press conference this afternoon:

Reform UK has announced it would abolish the right of migrants to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK after five years, if the party wins the next election.

Under the plans, Reform would abolish the right of migrants to apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) - which gives migrants rights and access to benefits - and reapply for new visas with tougher rules.

Reform will also unveil plans to bar anyone other than British citizens from accessing welfare. The party claims their plans would save £234bn over several decades.

Reform said it would replace ILR with visas that force migrants to reapply every five years. That includes hundreds of thousands of migrants currently in the UK.
Applicants would also have to meet certain criteria, including a higher salary threshold and standard of English.

The announcement launches Reform's fresh assault on what they brand the "Boriswave" - 3.8 million people who entered the UK after Brexit under looser rules brought in by Boris Johnson's administration.

Speaking at a press conference, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the "main reason" for the policy was to "wake everybody up to the Boris wave".

Hundreds of thousands of these migrants, who have come to the UK since 2021, will soon qualify for permanent residence under the ILR scheme.

Reform said the changes would not apply to EU nationals whose settled status is protected under the European Union Withdrawal Agreement, who make up the majority of benefit claimants by people with ILR.

But EU nationals not benefiting from the provisions of the Withdrawal Agreement will be subject to the new system.

Reform will also introduce a new scheme called Acute Skills Shortage Visas (ASSV) for jobs in crisis. Under the scheme, firms can hire one worker from abroad only if they train one at home.

Reform will also raise the average wait for UK citizenship from six years to seven.

Reform say their policy is designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the US and United Arab Emirates (UAE) and save the UK more than £234bn over what it calls the "lifetime of the average migrant".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c930xypxpqpo

But, while switching from Indefinite Leave to Remain is costly, there is no proposed requirement to have a minimum income threshold to get citizenship.

Sorry tagged the wrong post, I was replying to the above poster.

Non EU migrants are currently a small percentage of universal credit claimants as you say.

His argument is that there are another 800,000 Non EU migrants in the pipeline and it is their future effect on the welfare bill he says is the big problem.

Though I don’t don’t understand why he doesn’t just change the rules for new non EU migrants, if Reform get elected. People would find that more acceptable.

Over and over again it has been proven EU workers pay more tax that actually boring born so their contribution is big and even if a percentage received state welfare they more than pay for that . I can’t believe there are idiots if this thread actually defending removing people from ho have lived here for decades . My oldest was born over 20 years here is here under the settlement scheme , he is severely disabled . I’m assuming you all think he should be send home depute home being the U.K. as he never lived elsewhere or has family elsewhere .

So where is the economic analysis showing the percentage of these that are forecast to become claimants, the total cost of this, the total cost of implementing his proposed policies, and the overall economic impact including the skills shortages that will be caused suppressing tax revenues and growth?

Why is the decision to remove indefinite leave to remain as a status entirely, even retrospectively from those who have been here for decades, not just make changes going forwards?

If the concern is access to benefits why not uncouple ILR status from entitlement to welfare and state services and simply make these entitlements contributory as they are in pretty much every other developed country, so they are based on UK tax revenues paid by the individual rather than nationality?

Why remove pensions from long-term UK residents who are foreign citizens and who’ve met the contribution criteria over decades of work here?

Answer: it has nothing to do with economics or contributing to society and is solely an excuse for him to pander to disgusting xenophobia.

According to the ONS - 1.4% of small shops are foreign owned. I don’t understand the relevance of ‘foreign ancestry’ . In the context of this thread - it is about whether you have British citizenship or not.

I’m no supporter of Reform. But whipping up statistics is scaremongering - on either side of the debate.

And he can’t change the rules of EU immigrants anyway because of the exit treaty implementing his beloved Brexit. Hahahaaaa. However, he was too incompetent and thick to realise this before making his announcement yesterday and it had to be pointed out to him by journalists.

These are the repressive fantasies of extremely right wing people. Can you imagine the hatred and violence that would go with them once there were this class of people who, given that Reform would have left the ECHR, were totally dependent on authority? Imagine the people who would want to work there.

The only good thing about what Farage said yesterday is that it is really obvious now what kind of policies he wants and you can’t pretend otherwise. There has been this kind of ridiculous pretence that this is all about asylum.

The real policy is anyone with ILR, it’s abolition as a status for everyone. Be a citizen or a guest worker. As for “settled status” it doesn’t take a genius to realise that having this status which is ILR legally would be nibbled down incrementally such that you could remain, but your access to public services would be greatly cut.

But as I understand it, Farage is firstly concerned with India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, so it will be a while before he gets around to to that.

Surely law abiding people will leave when they no longer have the legal basis to stay. Some posts are a bit fantastic. Most people follow legal requirements.

He also made it clear in his comments that his policies were to protect “working British families” only and said he will make “huge welfare cuts” which would obviously exceed cutting 2.7% of universal credit currently paid to those he intends to deport. Added together with his defence of Trump’s attack on autistic people it’s clear that he will be targeting anybody vulnerable, poor or disabled and being a British citizen won’t save you. These are just the policies that he believes are mild enough - despite their already extreme nature - to be explicit about long in advance of the next general election.

What these sociopaths would do if ever elected doesn’t bear thinking about. They really couldn’t make their intentions much clearer and anybody who thinks they are safe because they are a British citizen is deluded. Farage openly and sycophantically emulates Trump so unless you and all of your family members are wealthy, white, male, heterosexual, and in perfect health, voting for Reform would be insanity.

Depends. If people have fallen on hard economic times and they're no longer entitled to any state help, where are they even going to find the money for airfares and relocation costs?

There are posters continuing to defend this policy. It beggars belief. I guess they think Farage's net of hate won't ever touch them or the people they care about.

So, to check, if people who have made their lives here (in good faith, following all the requirements and laws at each step) and hold indefinite leave to remain, have this status retrospectively revoked by Nigel&Co and replaced by {some time-limited visa which they'll have to keep reapplying for}, this is fine and dandy?

As has been pointed out repeatedly, some people - having lived in the UK for many decades - are not in a position to relocate. They may now be elderly. They may never have lived in their country of origin since they were a child and have little connection to it whatsoever. Their spouses and children might not qualify for residency in their country of origin, or speak the language, or be able to move for other reasons such as having elderly parents to care for or UK-specific jobs or qualifications, so families will be forcibly separated even though the people being deported had moved to the UK entirely legally and have been law-abiding and tax-paying UK citizens for decades and built a life, home and family here.

Most legal requirements are not imposed retrospectively, removing existing legal rights and forcibly uprooting people’s lives and expelling them like criminals when they’ve done nothing wrong.

Exactly. It reminds me again and again of that Niemöller poem. First, they came for the "illegal immigrants"...

And if they don't meet the requirements, will be forced to leave everything they have worked for behind.

I suppose if you view immigrants as lesser beings, you can kid yourself that it this is all OK.

I agree. It’s pretty obvious. How many Reform voters will look beyond the “prioritizing the British citizen” which is the title of Reform’s policy paper is another question.

If I were a right wing, well educated sotto racist with money I would however back Reform to give me all my dreams. The only question is who else thinks it’s good and why. If I were below this 60k line I would be thinking carefully

You already have that! Visas based on work already secured (and it costs the employer, so they are incentivised to get hard-to-find skills) no right to being family over outside a direct set of immediate nuclear family , the lot. A lot of beliefs about the immigration system Britons have are 30 or more years out of date.

The areas you could actually tighten are around committing to hiring British medical and nursing graduates into entry level positions instead of opening them up to international applicants, and possibly also finding more British health care education places.

https://www.gov.uk/uk-family-visa

I’m referring to the deportation posts below where people are rounded up or put together. If they do get elected with this policy I’d say most people are law abiding and will not stay.

I mean they can with citizenship of course but if they choose not to do that.

Has Reform clarified whether the proposal will apply to those with ILR who are married to British citizens? If so, this is extremely shocking and will rip families apart. Most people will not be able to meet the proposed £60k per annum income test.
.

Yes, citizenship is an option to those who wish to remain without the restrictive elements of reapplying for ILR under this proposal. Those who would rather live here without applying for citizenship have a higher hoop to jump through. Those whose country of origin won't allow people to retain dual citizenship are being restricted by their own country's legislation.

I think it's an ill thought out policy without much meat on the bones, but I don't think it merits the hyperbole on the thread.

I thought the poster who suggested that this was more a policy to propel the idea of 'Boriswave' further into the media language - as a kind of preparatory gut punch to any ambition of his return - had an interesting idea that I hadn't considered. Especially as Kemi runs down the clock to another leadership challenge.

Reform announced that they would scrap dual citizenship.

Obviously a contravention of the GFA.
But also a problem for plenty of people here from Australia, US, Israel and India etc.

India doesn't allow dual citizenship anyway.

Was that in their package yesterday? I suppose it's an option that's available.

@Upstartled

Aren’t they also proposing to increase the time period to apply for citizenship? So if you have had ILR for more than 5 years but less than the 10 year period Reform are suggesting, then you will need to meet the new financial income test and reapply for a Visa. If you can’t prove an income £60k, then you will be deported.

What I’m not clear on is whether there will be an exception for someone with ILR who is married to a British citizen.