Earned Settlement: A Cruel Betrayal of Migrants and the Promise of Belonging

Earned Settlement: A Cruel Betrayal of Migrants and the Promise of Belonging

The debate over immigration in the UK all too often loses sight of the people at its heart,  those who have made this country their home, paid taxes, worked in our communities and invested in its future. Yet the government’s latest “earned settlement” proposals would deliberately place permanent status further out of our reach, undermining stability, community cohesion and trust in our immigration system. This is not a technical reform. It is a political choice that sends a chilling message: some people will always remain outsiders.

At the core of these plans is a radical shift from a time-based route to settlement, where migrants could apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) after five years, to, essentially, a conditional, contribution-based system. Under this “earned” model, migrants could typically wait ten years before qualifying, with longer periods, up to 15 or even 20 years plus, imposed for particularly lower-paid workers, those who needed to claim financial support, or those whose earnings fall below arbitrary thresholds. Higher-paid migrants might see their route shortened, but most of us would be left in limbo for years longer than under the current rules. 

“Such an act would tell me, and all global talent, that the UK's promises are "temporary" and that it is an "unstable and unreliable" place to invest your life”

To those in Westminster, “earned settlement” might read as “common sense”, a line used frequently by politicians defending this proposal. They claim they are just “rewarding contribution”, “discouraging misuse” and “ensuring those who settle have fully integrated”. But in practice, this model ties security of status to income, labour market performance and subjective assessments of “integration”, metrics that reflect structural inequality more than genuine belonging. For many families and workers, the impact will be deeply destabilising.

“To enact these proposals retrospectively would not be a simple policy change, it would be a profound breach of faith and a betrayal.”

Firstly, it punishes the very people the system claims to value. Nurses, care workers, cleaners, hospitality staff and others in essential sectors were often recruited precisely because the UK lacks domestic workers willing or able to do those jobs. The care sector alone has more than 100,000 vacancies, and has for many years, even with current immigration rules for example. Thousands entered on five-year routes expecting to settle, only to learn that they may instead be placed on 15-year pathways. Without indefinite leave to remain, they remain tethered to specific jobs and employers, creating conditions ripe for exploitation. 

Many who earn below the income thresholds, disproportionately women, carers and those with caregiving responsibilities, will bear the brunt of this shift. Because the earned settlement model privileges continuous, paid employment, it replicates gender and racial pay gaps within immigration law, effectively locking in disadvantage and penalising those with non-linear careers or caregiving breaks. 

“The additional financial burden of further fees and an extended process would make it impossible for me to continue meeting the costs involved.”

Meanwhile, dependent partners, often non-earning or part-time workers, could find themselves on separate, longer settlement pathways than their partners, facing repeated visa costs and uncertainty even as they build lives here. 

The human cost extends to children too. For families who arrived anticipating settlement within five years, a sudden retrospective increase to ten or more years could see young people turning 18 before their family becomes eligible to settle, forcing them into a separate, often more costly and uncertain immigration pathway on their own. This would see young adults within families being potentially left on visa routes after other family members, even though they have always lived with those family members.

Perhaps the most insidious effect of these proposals is the environment of insecurity and fear they create. When settlement becomes conditional, migrants are continually reminded that our future hangs on economic performance and bureaucratic discretion. Workers in care homes report constant anxiety, every discussion with managers ends with the word “visa”, not “career progression”. Rather than fostering integration, this breeds isolation and undermines trust in public institutions.

“Why should people have to prove themselves over and over when they have already contributed so much to society.”

Critics have warned that frequent rule changes and retrospective application make the system a “moving target”, eroding confidence that time spent in the UK will ever lead to lasting rights. Without clear impact assessments or transitional arrangements, migrants face years of uncertainty, a far cry from the stability that permanent settlement once offered.

The government champions “earned settlement” as fair and modern. But fairness demands more than a checklist of earnings and tests met. True fairness recognises that security of status, belonging and dignity are not privileges to be bargained for, but rights that underpin social cohesion. Arbitrary penalties for claiming benefits, rigid income tests, and prolonged insecurity are not tools of integration, they are mechanisms of exclusion.

In the long run, this reform risks not only the wellbeing of migrant communities, but the fabric of British society. A system that rents belonging rather than grants it corrodes trust, weakens families and devalues people based on narrow definitions of worth.

If the UK is serious about integration, economic contribution and community cohesion, it must scrap the punitive elements of these proposals. Settlement should not be a reward for some, nor a punishment for others. It should be a genuine path to stability, one that acknowledges migrants not as temporary guests earning acceptance, but as neighbours and contributors whose futures enrich all our lives.