Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is facing accusations of delaying crucial immigration reforms, prompting criticism that the Labour party is hesitant to implement stricter measures on migrant rights. Nearly a year after promising significant changes to the system for gaining indefinite leave to remain (ILR), the reforms have not been enacted.
Critics, including Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp, argue that the delay allows approximately 1,100 individuals per day to secure the right to remain in Britain, granting them access to benefits and housing. Philp stated that Mahmood "chickened out" of implementing reforms, suggesting internal party divisions are responsible for the inaction.
The proposed crackdown, announced in November, aimed to double the qualifying period for ILR from five years to ten years. It also included provisions to extend waiting times for those who commit crimes, pay less tax, or claim benefits. Illegal migrants faced the longest penalty, with a proposed 30-year waiting period for settled status. These measures were intended to apply retrospectively to an estimated two million migrants who arrived in the UK since 2021.
These proposed changes were notably absent from the Home Office's updated immigration rules published recently, indicating no progress in the ten months since their announcement. Mahmood had previously emphasized the necessity of these reforms to mitigate the financial burden on the Treasury, noting that migrants eligible for ILR can incur significant lifetime costs to taxpayers.
Philp asserted that Mahmood's hesitation stems from fear of opposition from left-wing Labour backbenchers who advocate for more open border policies. He stressed the urgency, pointing out that over 1,000 migrants are granted permanent residency daily, many of whom have not worked or entered the country legally.
Mahmood herself had previously warned about the potential for increased public anger and division if immigration levels were not addressed. Her consultation paper highlighted the projected increase in ILR applications, estimating that migrants on lower wages with non-working dependents could represent substantial fiscal costs. The paper suggested that under current rules, this group typically qualifies for benefits and housing five years after arrival, with eligibility expected to begin in 2027 for those who arrived from 2022 onwards.
However, the plans reportedly triggered opposition within the Labour party, with 35 MPs signing an open letter against the proposals in February. Angela Rayner, then a backbencher, reportedly described the scheme as "un-British" and "wrong."
When the ILR reforms were not included in Labour's June immigration Bill, the department indicated they would be implemented through secondary legislation. While expected in the autumn update of Home Office immigration rules, they were absent from the latest published version. The Home Office stated that a consultation on elements of the reforms has closed and a response will be issued in due course.
Recent figures show a substantial increase in successful ILR applications. In the year to June, 199,628 applications were approved, a 24% rise from the previous year, averaging 547 per day. The three months to June saw a 38% increase, equating to over 1,100 successful applications each working day during that period. This surge is attributed to record immigration levels following the pandemic, with net migration reaching a record 944,000 in 2023.
Under Mahmood's proposed reforms, migrants demonstrating significant contributions to society would receive shorter ILR waiting times. For instance, foreign workers in essential public sector roles like doctors and nurses would have a five-year qualifying period. Highly skilled, high-earning individuals would also benefit, with reduced waiting times based on their income tax bracket.
Home Office estimates project ILR applications to peak between 359,000 and 620,000 in 2028. The financial impact of different migrant groups is a key consideration, with low-paid care workers estimated to have a net lifetime cost to the taxpayer, while skilled workers are projected to contribute significantly more in taxes than they consume in public services.
