Nigel Farage’s recent initiative to limit migrants’ ability to seek permanent residency has faced immediate setbacks due to an error in financial calculations.
The leader of Reform UK proposed eliminating indefinite leave to remain (ILR) upon his party’s potential victory, replacing it with a system requiring migrants to renew their visas every five years, subject to stricter requirements such as a higher income threshold and proficiency in English. Additionally, applicants would need to have resided in the UK for seven years instead of five, with more stringent regulations on bringing family members into the country. The revised visa scheme would also bar access to welfare benefits, according to the party’s announcement.
Farage and Reform’s policy chief, Zia Yusuf, asserted that the proposed changes would save British taxpayers over £230 billion. However, this claim was found to be based on outdated figures from a report by the Centre of Policy Studies, which the think tank has disavowed.
A source from the Labour party criticized Farage’s plan, labeling it as ill-conceived and lacking credibility. They accused Reform UK of promoting division rather than addressing the country’s challenges.
In response, Keir Starmer’s spokesperson accused Reform UK of evading real issues to sow discord. The Prime Minister’s press secretary echoed these sentiments, dismissing Farage’s proposals as unrealistic and unsustainable.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves also cast doubt on Reform UK’s savings projections, stating that their plan was already unraveling. She emphasized the government’s efforts to reduce illegal migration and overhaul the welfare system, contrasting them with Reform’s purportedly flawed approach.
Farage emphasized at a press briefing that Reform UK would restrict welfare benefits to UK citizens only, aiming to rectify what he termed as the failures of the Boris Johnson government. A government representative reiterated the existing policy of denying benefits to illegal residents and hinted at extending the waiting period for foreign nationals to access welfare benefits.
A spokesperson for Reform UK defended their cost estimates, arguing that the actual fiscal impact could surpass current projections due to higher ILR uptake rates among specific migrant cohorts.
Overall, the controversy surrounding Farage’s immigration proposals underscores the ongoing debate over UK migration policies and the fiscal implications of potential reforms.