The Government has announced major changes to eligibility for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), also known as settlement, and is planning to consult on the proposed changes later this year. The purpose of this inquiry is to evaluate the evidence for, and potential impact of, the planned changes to inform and feed into the new …
| Title | HC No. | Published | Items | Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6th Report - Earned Settlement: Examining the Government’s … | HC 1409 | 13 Mar 2026 | 36 | Overdue |
The Government has developed the proposals in its Earned Settlement consultation to respond to the unprecedented levels of immigration to the country in recent years, particularly of medium-skilled workers. We recognise that the Government is responding to a challenging situation, as a large number of people will soon become eligible …
The Government has proposed requiring all immigrants to earn at least £12,570 a year in order to be able to settle permanently in the UK. This will apply more widely than just to economic migrants—family migrants and arrivals on humanitarian routes will also be affected. It is reasonable to expect …
There should be reasonable and clear exceptions to the mandatory minimum economic contribution requirement so that people are not prevented from settling where there are legitimate reasons they cannot 57 meet this requirement. This could include exemptions for disabled people, people over pension age, those who are studying full-time, and …
The Government’s current proposals would allow shorter routes to settlement based on meeting earning requirements set at current income tax thresholds. This means that people who make a net positive direct fiscal contribution to the UK, but earn below the higher rate tax threshold, could face a 10-year route to …
We recommend that the Home Office set out clear objectives for the basis on which fiscal contributions qualify immigrants for a reduction to their wait for settlement. The Home Office should then commission the Migration Advisory Committee to advise on appropriate thresholds based on these objectives. (Recommendation, Paragraph 25) Assessing …
Applying income-based reductions to qualifying periods for settlement at an individual, rather than a household level, could lead to perverse outcomes, and obscure the contribution of immigrants who take on a greater proportion of caregiving, whose care may enable their partners to take on more demanding and higher earning careers. …
We recommend that the Home Office applies reductions to qualifying periods for settlement for direct fiscal contribution at a household level, not at an individual level, to recognise that generally households make financial decisions as units. (Recommendation, Paragraph 31) 58 Workers Classifying medium-skilled workers
It appears that the main purpose of putting medium-skilled workers on a 15-year route to settlement is fiscal, because medium-skilled workers are, on average, lower earners. It is odd and unnecessary to use RQF skill levels as a proxy for income when making decisions about settlement, rather than assessing income …
If the Home Office proceeds with putting lower-paid workers on a 15-year route to settlement, it should do so on the basis of income, and not the RQF classification of their role, as this will not necessarily reflect their direct economic contribution, which appears to be the Government’s justification for …
There is a benefit to having a sponsored work visa system in that it supports oversight and makes it easier for the Home Office to confirm immigrants are coming to work in genuine roles. However, sponsorship-based visa systems increase the amount of power that employers have over their workers and …
The Home Office should explore more flexible visa arrangements for workers it is planning to place on long routes to settlement, so they are not reliant on a particular employer to maintain their immigration status. Workers granted sponsored visas could transition to a more flexible visa after a set amount …
There were fundamental failures in the implementation and oversight of the care worker visa route when it was expanded in 2022, which led to unexpectedly high numbers of arrivals in a short space of time. The Home Office significantly underestimated the level of demand for the route and was slow …
The Home Office is facing an extremely difficult choice. If no changes are made to eligibility for settled status, hundreds of thousands of care workers and their dependants will become eligible for settled status in the next few years—gaining access to public funds and likely drawing on the public purse. …
If the Government implements a 15-year qualifying period for adult social care workers, we recommend that it takes urgent action to support decent pay and conditions for this group. The Home Office should set out in response to this report the steps it will be taking to support migrant care …
It is extremely hard to predict what impact these changes will have on the social care workforce. Given the level of overseas recruitment that has taken place, decisions about routes to settlement for social care workers are likely to affect a significant proportion of the care workforce, which could have …
The Home Office should—in partnership with the Department of Health and Social Care—conduct a full assessment of the potential impact of its planned changes to routes to settlement on the adult social care workforce, and on the stability of the sector. The Home Office should not rush to make changes …
The planned changes to settlement routes will see some children who arrive in the UK at a young age spending most, if not all, of their childhood with temporary immigration status. The changes will also see some young people who came to the UK as children entering their late twenties …
Children who arrive at a young age and grow up in the UK should be granted settled status by the age of 18 without needing to fulfil the requirements of the ‘Earned Settlement’ model, in recognition of the fact that Britain is their home. Children who arrive at a later …
Under the proposed reforms parents may settle at very different times from each other. In cases where parents are placed on different routes to settlement, children should achieve settlement with whichever parent settles first. (Recommendation, Paragraph 71) Access to university
Extending routes to settlement will increase the number of children and young people in the UK who are not eligible for home fee status. This is likely to lead to some young people delaying or missing out on going to university. Access to education promotes integration and enables greater contribution …
Eligibility for home fee status should be reviewed in light of the changes to routes to settlement, to ensure that children and young people who have lived in the UK for a significant period of time are not prevented from going to university due to lack of home fee status. …
The changes set out in the Earned Settlement consultation will place lower earning families on longer routes to settlement. This will very likely increase child poverty, and the harms resulting from child poverty. The children of care workers, who are poorly paid and would face a 15-year route to settlement, …
We recommend that the Government conducts and publishes an assessment of the impact on child poverty of its planned changes to routes to settlement, before finalising and implementing these changes. To mitigate the impact of the changes, the Home Office should make it easier for parents who are subject to …
Most immigrants can only access benefits in rare circumstances and must be granted permission to do so by the Home Office. We are concerned that penalising people in difficult circumstances who urgently need support will deepen poverty and increase pressures on local authorities. It would be deeply unfair to apply …
We recommend that the Home Office does not apply any penalties for accessing public funds on the basis of benefit claims that preceded the Government’s new policy. There should be discretion for reasonable and fair exemptions to this penalty, where the applicant can demonstrate that they have only accessed public …
The current 10-year family or private life pathway is a challenging route to settlement for families who are on it. The route is expensive, and it is easy for people who are trying to comply with the rules to fall off the route. The 10-year route can cause genuine hardship …
We recommend that people who under the current system would be on a 10- year family or private life route to settlement be given a route under the new rules that is reasonable and achievable. People should not be placed on a 30-year route to settlement. To reduce the financial …
Children who are brought to the UK at a young age and grow up here are, for all intents and purposes, British. These children and young people should not be required to “earn” their right to remain in the UK. The rights of these children and young people should be …
As we previously recommended, the Government should ensure that all children who come to the UK at a young age and grow up in the UK are granted settled status by the age of 18. The Government should also maintain the 5-year private life route for children and young people …
A child who is born in the UK to someone who has settled status will automatically be British. Extending the waiting period for settlement will therefore increase the number of children born in the UK who are not automatically British citizens and will need to register at a future date …
The Home Office should review barriers to the registration of children and young adults as British citizens in light of the proposed changes to routes to settlement and take action to improve access to citizenship for children and young adults who are entitled to register as British citizens. This could …
There is a significant risk that extending routes to settlement will increase the number of families who are deeply rooted in the UK but have precarious immigration status. This is obviously not an intended goal of the Home Office and would increase administrative pressures on the immigration system, as well …
We are concerned about the plans to apply the proposed Earned Settlement model to people who are already in the country. It is in the interests of the Home Office, and the UK’s reputation, to be consistent in the application of immigration rules and policy. We agree that the Government …
We recommend that the Government carefully consider and set out clear mitigations—including suitable transitional arrangements—for people already in the UK who are affected by changes to routes to settlement. There should be specific protections for vulnerable people who may struggle to meet the criteria of the new system. The changes …
The Home Office has said that changes to eligibility for settlement will begin to be implemented from April 2026 but has not given a clear timeline of when specific changes will be implemented. Key elements of the proposals that could have unintended consequences remain unclear and under- developed. The Home …
The Home Office should learn from previous reforms that it is more important to get changes right than to implement them quickly. In order to deliver workable reforms of the kind set out in its Earned Settlement consultation, the department must take adequate time to assess the impact of its …
| Date | Witnesses | |
|---|---|---|
| 3 Feb 2026 | Anna Skehan · Migration and Refugee Children’s Legal Unit, Islington Law Centre, Chrisann Jarrett MBE · We Belong, Matthew Percival · Confederation of British Industry, Michelle Lee-Izu · Barnardo’s, Peter Wieltschnig · Trades Union Congress, Professor Martin Green OBE · Care England, Solange Valdez-Symonds · Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens | View ↗ |
| 21 Jan 2026 | Alan Manning · London School of Economics, Dr Madeleine Sumption MBE · Oxford Migration Observatory, Nicolas Rollason · Kingsley Napley LLP | View ↗ |
| Date | Direction | Title |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Mar 2026 | To cttee | Letter from the Chief Operating Officer from Barnardo's relating to routes to s… |
| 4 Feb 2026 | To cttee | Letter from the Home Secretary relating to the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)… |
| 4 Feb 2026 | From cttee | Letter to the Home Secretary relating to the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) f… |