Nigel Farage’s recent initiative to restrict migrants’ eligibility for permanent residency has quickly encountered difficulties due to a miscalculation concerning savings.
The leader of Reform UK proposed eliminating indefinite leave to remain (ILR) if his party gains power. Currently, migrants can apply for ILR after five years, but Reform UK intends to mandate visa renewal every five years, subject to specific criteria like a higher income threshold and improved English proficiency. The residency requirement would increase to seven years, and there would be stricter regulations on bringing family members to the UK. Moreover, the new visa scheme would bar access to benefits, according to the party.
Farage and Reform’s policy chief, Zia Yusuf, claimed potential savings to taxpayers exceeding £230 billion. However, these figures seem to rely on a report from the Centre of Policy Studies issued in February, which the think tank advised against using.
A Labour source criticized Reform UK, stating that their proposal has already unraveled and lacks credibility. Keir Starmer’s spokesperson accused Reform UK of avoiding real issues to sow division, while the Prime Minister’s press secretary dismissed Farage’s plans as unrealistic and unsustainable.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves questioned the claimed savings, suggesting they are unsubstantiated. The Government emphasized its efforts to combat illegal migration and reform the welfare system to reduce the benefits bill.
Reform UK defended its position, arguing that the actual fiscal impact could be much higher than estimated due to varying ILR uptake rates among different migrant cohorts.
Overall, the debate over Farage’s proposal highlights the contentious nature of immigration policy and the challenges in finding effective solutions to complex societal issues.
