Proposed immigration changes discussion thread - UK set to limit permanent residency for some migrants

[secret.simon]

Financial Times: UK set to limit permanent residency for some migrants
(the link is behind a paywall and you may need a subscription to read the article. I have a subscription via my workplace. It may be worth checking if your workplace offers a similar corporate subscription)

The FT, a paper not known for being politically leaning one way or another and for fairly neutral reporting, is reporting that the government may be looking at extending the default period for ILR from five years to 10 years in an upcoming Immigration White Paper expected in the next few weeks.

This is obviously in response to the recent local election results in England.

"At present, most people who come to the UK on time-limited visas can apply for indefinite leave to remain after they have lived and worked in the country for five years. The permanent status opens up eligibility for benefits and a path to citizenship.

Ministers are preparing proposals that could extend this period to as long as ten years for some migrants, for example where there were questions over their financial status or whether they had spent too much time outside the UK since arriving, the people familiar with the matter said. Tougher language requirements are also under consideration."

The Tories want to go further and "exempt all immigration matters from the need to comply with the Human Rights Act."

And of course the UK is not the only one toughening up on immigration. Germany's day old new government has already announced that it will look at rejecting asylum seekers at the border itself.

I've just returned from a trip to Germany and for the first time, my British passport was checked multiple times even when traveling by train within Germany (i.e. not crossing an EU/Schengen border).

The populist right-wing parties may not be in government in most countries ini Europe, but they are making the political weather.

[razergd1]

Well, it's difficult to explain here how broken is the immigration system in the UK.


The entire skilled worker route is shambles. The sponsor register contains fast food restaurants, butchers, etc and eligible professions are including carers, shop managers etc. which by definition are not 'skilled' work. Let alone the mess in the channel.
Add to this that that successive governments here let universities sell visas rather than education and you got unsustainable immigration numbers which has a knock on effect on everything, from the crippling private rental sector through exhausted NHS and social services.

The 10 years to settlement is a panic response rather than something I would call logic, but the government should start to think how immigration can be used to support economic growth rather the decline.

In my view, if there is shortage is certain non-skilled professions, for example care sector, the government can apply short term (for example up to 3 years with 2 years cooling period) work visas with no route to settlement to plug the hole and in parallel to improve the working conditions in that sector to make it appealing for the domestic settled workforce.

I would like to point out that I'm not undermining here the important service that carers are providing, however, any job that does not require extensive training is not skilled by definition.

With these being said as a member of this forum I'm intending to direct people to a suitable immigration route when there is such even if my in my personal opinion the route is a policy mistake.

[humanist100]

The new system will end automatic settlement and citizenship for anyone living here for five years.

Instead, migrants must spend a decade in the UK before applying to stay unless they can show a real and lasting contribution to the economy and society.

Under a new framework to be rolled out high-skilled, high-contributing individuals who play by the rules and contribute to the economy and society would be fast-tracked, such as nurses, doctors, engineers and AI leaders.

The government will also raise English language requirements across every immigration route to ensure those wishing to live and work in the UK speak a higher standard of English.

For the first time this will also extend to all adult dependents by requiring them to demonstrate a basic understanding of English – helping individuals integrate into their local community, find employment and reducing the risk of exploitation and abuse.

Britain will remain open to the best global talent – but the days of mass recruitment to plug avoidable skills gaps will end. New mechanisms will ensure employers wanting visas must show they are investing in British workers and raising skills in this country to boost economic growth.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prim ... -migration

[MNR81]

hello everyone,

will the 10 years residency requirment impact people who were already here on 5 years route? my Mrs is on spouse visa and will be eligible to apply next september based on 5 years residency, we are worrying if we will be impacted by the new rules..

[rajesh9pl]

Its early to comment. Let full policy document to come out. Many times, rules are not applied retrospectively.

[secret.simon]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

[777GE90]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

Very nice breakdown, some good observations there.

I am wondering what your thoughts are in regards to the English language test and Life in the UK. The white paper suggests changes to both. I'm in a situation now where my wife (spouse visa) already has a B1 and yet to take the Life in the UK, with our ILR application set for June 26. I am wondering if last minute they change the requirements and all of a sudden she'll need a B2 and an older Life in the UK would no longer be valid.

I'm kinda trying to understand whether it's worth her taking a Life in the UK test now or not bothering as it may not be valid then. Or do you think for old applicants the requirements won't change for ILR?

[anhkiet1903]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

Thanks for the analysis!

But I do think you have missed out quite a few things Yvette Cooper has said about how are they looking to implement this.

Firstly, Yvette has confirmed that the changes to ILR will be passed in its own Bill whereas other changes such as salary threshold will be implemented more swiftly so I assume via Statuory Instrument. It is also worth noting her foreword to the White Paper:

"Later this Summer, we will set out further reforms to the asylum system and to border security in response to irregular and illegal migration, including plans for new legislation building on the new measures already set out in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill that is currently passing through Parliament."

She drew a distinction between this and the white paper which addresses legal migration. So I don’t think they are looking to add amendments to the Bill that is currently going through Parliament (relating to illegal migration) for the changes outlined in the White Paper and they will draft another Bill specifically for legal migration.

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

[anhkiet1903]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

Thanks for the analysis!

But I do think you have missed out quite a few things Yvette Cooper has said about how are they looking to implement this.

Firstly, Yvette has confirmed that the changes to ILR will be passed in its own Bill whereas other changes such as salary threshold will be implemented more swiftly so I assume via Statuory Instrument. It is also worth noting her foreword to the White Paper:

"Later this Summer, we will set out further reforms to the asylum system and to border security in response to irregular and illegal migration, including plans for new legislation building on the new measures already set out in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill that is currently passing through Parliament."

She drew a distinction between this and the white paper which addresses legal migration. So I don’t think they are looking to add amendments to the Bill that is currently going through Parliament (relating to illegal migration) for the changes outlined in the White Paper and they will draft another Bill specifically for legal migration.

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

Just to clarify that Yvette hasn’t explicitly confirmed that the ILR changes will be via a Bill but only strong evidence towards.

[kpmsc]

The new ILR rules as per white paper, says it will not be applicable for non-UK dependants of British citizens. Are skilled worker dependents included in this category? In our case I am a British citizen via a skilled worker, but my wife is still on a skilled worker dependent visa and completes 5 years in October 2025. Please advise.

[academic711]

The white paper explicitly state that discussion about the earned-residency scheme will be put before parliament by the end of this year. Unless we have this scheme outlined, ILR rule cannot change- unless we believe that they will initially do it universally for everyone and then few months down the line they will discuss how to amend it so that people can reduce their time based on their "contributions".
So I personally think ILR changes are very unlikely to be implemented this year. Also, note that it only effects those on point-based system not on visas like GTV- which I presume will be kept as it is as far as ILR qualifying time is concerned.
I personally think that it is a bad a new for those at lower earning theshold but not necessarily for those at the higher tax bracket or with higher skills. I teach economics and this is precisely what I teach. A very stringent implementation of this policy will skyrocket the wages here. So I personally think that the "contribution" criteria will not be as bad as threatening it may sound.

[londonpz]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

Hey you reckon the upgraded language settlement requirement (B1 to B2) will be in place by Oct 2025? One of my mates will be applying for SET (LR) and wants to know whether to take B1 or B2.

[Mem2025]

Another (locked) thread on the same topic that has the links and quotes from the White Paper.

White Paper: Restoring Control over the Immigration System

Quick observations
(a) At this point, this is just a White Paper, a government discussion paper laying out its proposed policies, but not yet law or rules.

(b) At this point, it only impacts immigration routes. Actual changes to naturalisation procedures would require primary legislation (Act of Parliament), which is quite time consuming. What the government can do is increase the amount of time it takes to get to ILR (which is a part of immigration law), because it is required to get ILR before applying for naturalisation. So effectively naturalisation is delayed without changing nationality law.

(c) This does not affect people under Appendix EU, who are protected by the Withdrawal Agreement.

(d) It will most likely not affect people already in the UK on a visa before the changes are enacted. There is a court judgement from the 2000s that people already in the UK on a visa continue to follow the pathway of that visa till completion. Keep in mind that if determined enough, the government can force this through an Act of Parliament, which can override court judgments. That is unlikely, as it is quite time-consuming (about a year).

The changes will likely be enacted as a change to the Immigration Rules, which can be done quite quickly by a Minister and normally requires only a 28 day period of notice to Parliament (as a rule, it is very rare for Parliament to vote against a government measure of this sort. The numbers of Statutory Instruments rejected by Parliament since WWII is in single digits).

It will affect those people already in the UK who change (whether by choice or by unexpected events such as their company shutting down, etc) their immigration pathway, because they will have changed the pathway to ILR to one under the new rules..

(e) In the other thread, user @glas195 has listed a specific timeline of events which I am not very sure of.

12 May 2025 White paper laid before Parliament; first-reading statement by Home Secretary.

Summer 2025 Draft Immigration Reform Bill and secondary legislation published for consultation.

April 2026 Main visa-rule changes and settlement clock switch take legal effect.

I haven't got the ear of the Home Secretary so I can't be certain, but I doubt it will take that long.

For a start, White Papers don't have First Readings, Bills do.

Secondly, the government may not bother with a Draft Bill (that is essentially what a White Paper is) and go straight in for an actual Bill.

Thirdly, secondary legislation does not require consultation. That is what the White Paper is; consultation. They are very unlikely to follow up a White Paper consultation with further consultation.

I suspect that the government is already working with its lawyers to draft the suggestions into law and I would expect any changes to the Immigration Rules (i.e. anything upto and including ILR) to be brought in either before Parliament rises for the summer recess (mid to late July) or just before the party conference season (September to October) for maximal press coverage.

Again note that the above is my hypothesis/guesswork.

EDIT: Turns out there is already a Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through Parliament. It has just completed its stages in the Commons today and will go to the Lords now.

So, if the government needs to amend or create primary legislation for its immigration proposals, it can just add the amendments in the Lords (or in the Commons during any future ping-pong) and the proposals will become law without introducing a new Act of Parliament.

I would expect the proposals outlined in the White Paper to be law at the latest by the end of this year, but quite likely much before then.

Thanks for the analysis!

But I do think you have missed out quite a few things Yvette Cooper has said about how are they looking to implement this.

Firstly, Yvette has confirmed that the changes to ILR will be passed in its own Bill whereas other changes such as salary threshold will be implemented more swiftly so I assume via Statuory Instrument. It is also worth noting her foreword to the White Paper:

"Later this Summer, we will set out further reforms to the asylum system and to border security in response to irregular and illegal migration, including plans for new legislation building on the new measures already set out in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill that is currently passing through Parliament."

She drew a distinction between this and the white paper which addresses legal migration. So I don’t think they are looking to add amendments to the Bill that is currently going through Parliament (relating to illegal migration) for the changes outlined in the White Paper and they will draft another Bill specifically for legal migration.

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

I was wondering will this ilr rules be retrospective? And if not what is the expected date they will use?

[secret.simon]

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

Than you for your analysis, @anhkiet1903. I had not watched or hear the Home Secretary's interview and hence did not have the details to fill in the gaps.

That got me thinking as to why the government would want to implement changes to ILR requirements via an Act of Parliament/primary legislation, when it could implement the same through secondary legislation (ILR is a part of the Immigration Rules and could be amended by secondary legislation).

I came to two conclusions,

(a) She was referring to amending the rules for naturalisation, not ILR and was confusing the two. Changing the rules for naturalisation would require primary legislation, AND/OR,

(b) She was looking at making the rule changes for ILR bullet-proof in court. There is already a court judgment stating that the Immigration Rules (which are secondary legislation) can't be changed for people already in the UK on a particular visa pathway. An Act of Parliament is supreme and can overturn a court judgment. Therefore my logical conclusion was that the rule change for ILR will in fact apply to people already in the UK as it will be enacted by Act of Parliament.

And it seems that the latter may be the case. The BBC's chief political reporter has confirmed that on Twitter/X, posting that "The government's new rules making migrants wait 10 years instead of 5 to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK are set to apply to people already in the country, subject to consultation".

So it seems that the government is likely to go through with an Act of Parliament to set aside the court judgment and apply the change of ILR requirements even to people already in the UK.

As for your last sentence, more sources are always welcome. I tend to prefer matter to read rather than to listen to or watch, so if the sources are transcribed, it would be greatly appreciated.

The white paper explicitly state that discussion about the earned-residency scheme will be put before parliament by the end of this year. Unless we have this scheme outlined, ILR rule cannot change- unless we believe that they will initially do it universally for everyone and then few months down the line they will discuss how to amend it so that people can reduce their time based on their "contributions".
So I personally think ILR changes are very unlikely to be implemented this year.

What they can do is that they can, by statutory instrument, pause/refuse to accept any ILR applications until after the consultation and in the meanwhile, treat any ILR application as an application for FLR.

I teach economics and this is precisely what I teach. A very stringent implementation of this policy will skyrocket the wages here.

In an ideal world, I'd have loved to pick your brains on the wage compression caused by the legal minimum wage going up while the rest of the wage market has remained static to barely moving at the rate of inflation. But that is not a topic for this site.

@londonpz and @Mem2025, to quote the great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld, your questions are a known unknown. We know that we do not know the answers to those questions. We'll have to await further updates from the government as this is a situation in flux.

EDIT: The Guardian: 1.5m foreign workers already in UK could face longer wait for permanent settlement

[777GE90]

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

Than you for your analysis, @anhkiet1903. I had not watched or hear the Home Secretary's interview and hence did not have the details to fill in the gaps.

That got me thinking as to why the government would want to implement changes to ILR requirements via an Act of Parliament/primary legislation, when it could implement the same through secondary legislation (ILR is a part of the Immigration Rules and could be amended by secondary legislation).

I came to two conclusions,

(a) She was referring to amending the rules for naturalisation, not ILR and was confusing the two. Changing the rules for naturalisation would require primary legislation, AND/OR,

(b) She was looking at making the rule changes for ILR bullet-proof in court. There is already a court judgment stating that the Immigration Rules (which are secondary legislation) can't be changed for people already in the UK on a particular visa pathway. An Act of Parliament is supreme and can overturn a court judgment. Therefore my logical conclusion was that the rule change for ILR will in fact apply to people already in the UK as it will be enacted by Act of Parliament.

And it seems that the latter may be the case. The BBC's chief political reporter has confirmed that on Twitter/X, posting that "The government's new rules making migrants wait 10 years instead of 5 to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK are set to apply to people already in the country, subject to consultation".

So it seems that the government is likely to go through with an Act of Parliament to set aside the court judgment and apply the change of ILR requirements even to people already in the UK.

As for your last sentence, more sources are always welcome. I tend to prefer matter to read rather than to listen to or watch, so if the sources are transcribed, it would be greatly appreciated.

The white paper explicitly state that discussion about the earned-residency scheme will be put before parliament by the end of this year. Unless we have this scheme outlined, ILR rule cannot change- unless we believe that they will initially do it universally for everyone and then few months down the line they will discuss how to amend it so that people can reduce their time based on their "contributions".
So I personally think ILR changes are very unlikely to be implemented this year.

What they can do is that they can, by statutory instrument, pause/refuse to accept any ILR applications until after the consultation and in the meanwhile, treat any ILR application as an application for FLR.

I teach economics and this is precisely what I teach. A very stringent implementation of this policy will skyrocket the wages here.

In an ideal world, I'd have loved to pick your brains on the wage compression caused by the legal minimum wage going up while the rest of the wage market has remained static to barely moving at the rate of inflation. But that is not a topic for this site.

@londonpz and @Mem2025, to quote the great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld, your questions are a known unknown. We know that we do not know the answers to those questions. We'll have to await further updates from the government as this is a situation in flux.

EDIT: The Guardian: 1.5m foreign workers already in UK could face longer wait for permanent settlement

Hmm not the kind of news I want to hear, given my wifes ILR is/was set for next year. However, from the white paper, it sounded like the 5 year route would remain for family visas, is my interpretion correct?

[kpmsc]

Secondly, Yvette has confirmed a few times now that the proposed changes to the ILR qualifying time will be opened to further consultation. BBC also confirms this:

"It is not yet clear when this longer qualifying period will kick in - details of the new system, along with a similar scheme that will apply to applications for citizenship, will be consulted on later this year."

This further confirms that they will go about enacting the core changes (such as ILR) via a Bill and that the White Paper is not the only consultation. Therefore, any chance that the core changes will be implemented this summer is nil, earliest I can see is end of this year but BBC was told that the likely timeline is early 2026.

So yes, small changes such as salary threshold can be implemented this year vis Statuory Instruments but the big changes such as increasing ILR time and implementing the "earned-based" settlement system will not be implemented this year as that will go through the Primary Legislation route (and will be in its own Act) and that there will be further consultation later this year regarding it so no chance it will be implemented latest end this year or much earlier as you suggested.

Please do let me know if you want to see any sources etc.

Than you for your analysis, @anhkiet1903. I had not watched or hear the Home Secretary's interview and hence did not have the details to fill in the gaps.

That got me thinking as to why the government would want to implement changes to ILR requirements via an Act of Parliament/primary legislation, when it could implement the same through secondary legislation (ILR is a part of the Immigration Rules and could be amended by secondary legislation).

I came to two conclusions,

(a) She was referring to amending the rules for naturalisation, not ILR and was confusing the two. Changing the rules for naturalisation would require primary legislation, AND/OR,

(b) She was looking at making the rule changes for ILR bullet-proof in court. There is already a court judgment stating that the Immigration Rules (which are secondary legislation) can't be changed for people already in the UK on a particular visa pathway. An Act of Parliament is supreme and can overturn a court judgment. Therefore my logical conclusion was that the rule change for ILR will in fact apply to people already in the UK as it will be enacted by Act of Parliament.

And it seems that the latter may be the case. The BBC's chief political reporter has confirmed that on Twitter/X, posting that "The government's new rules making migrants wait 10 years instead of 5 to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK are set to apply to people already in the country, subject to consultation".

So it seems that the government is likely to go through with an Act of Parliament to set aside the court judgment and apply the change of ILR requirements even to people already in the UK.

As for your last sentence, more sources are always welcome. I tend to prefer matter to read rather than to listen to or watch, so if the sources are transcribed, it would be greatly appreciated.

The white paper explicitly state that discussion about the earned-residency scheme will be put before parliament by the end of this year. Unless we have this scheme outlined, ILR rule cannot change- unless we believe that they will initially do it universally for everyone and then few months down the line they will discuss how to amend it so that people can reduce their time based on their "contributions".
So I personally think ILR changes are very unlikely to be implemented this year.

What they can do is that they can, by statutory instrument, pause/refuse to accept any ILR applications until after the consultation and in the meanwhile, treat any ILR application as an application for FLR.

I teach economics and this is precisely what I teach. A very stringent implementation of this policy will skyrocket the wages here.

In an ideal world, I'd have loved to pick your brains on the wage compression caused by the legal minimum wage going up while the rest of the wage market has remained static to barely moving at the rate of inflation. But that is not a topic for this site.

@londonpz and @Mem2025, to quote the great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld, your questions are a known unknown. We know that we do not know the answers to those questions. We'll have to await further updates from the government as this is a situation in flux.

EDIT: The Guardian: 1.5m foreign workers already in UK could face longer wait for permanent settlement

Looks like the government is very strong in bringing the rule ASAP. But how soon is my question. My partner is due for ILR middle of October 2025 via SWV dependant route, but I have British citizenship via SWV route. Not sure SWV dependants of British citizens would come under 10 years route too for ILR. Some please throw some light on this.

[alterhase58]

Foreign dependents of British citizens don’t get special advantages. They must complete their immigration pathway according to the rules.

[secret.simon]

Looks like the government is very strong in bringing the rule ASAP. But how soon is my question. My partner is due for ILR middle of October 2025 via SWV dependant route, but I have British citizenship via SWV route. Not sure SWV dependants of British citizens would come under 10 years route too for ILR. Some please throw some light on this.

to quote the great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld, your questions are a known unknown. We know that we do not know the answers to those questions. We'll have to await further updates from the government as this is a situation in flux.

Hmm not the kind of news I want to hear, given my wifes ILR is/was set for next year. However, from the white paper, it sounded like the 5 year route would remain for family visas, is my interpretion correct?

Quite likely, but we simply do not know. This is a consultation and we do not know how this would develop.