Last week, the government unveiled its much-heralded white paper setting out a roadmap intended for restoring control over immigration. The paper’s controversial tone alleged that inward migration had ‘exploded’. It attributed pressure on public services and housing access to the UK having become a ‘one-nation experiment in open borders’.
With overarching themes of control, contribution and community cohesion, the proposals signal a decisive shift.
The government intends to place tighter restrictions on sponsorship, initially relating to lower-skilled migration and, over time, widen the net to higher-skilled roles to discourage ‘over-recruiting from abroad’.
Employers will be prevented from sponsoring individuals from overseas in roles below graduate level (RQF 6), other than in limited circumstances. This reverses the flexibility introduced in December 2020, when the skill level threshold for overseas hires was lowered to A-level equivalent (RQF 3).
Employers will only be permitted to sponsor workers in lower-skilled roles temporarily, where the role is a critical shortage occupation and the employer has a workforce strategy in place. Mandated workforce strategies will be informed by a new body, the Labour Market Evidence Group, with the aim of increasing access to training and employment in the UK. This will likely add to already expensive and administratively burdensome sponsorship costs.
A steep 32% rise in the immigration skills charge is also aimed at lowering net migration. Businesses currently pay up to £1,000 a year per sponsored worker. For those that rely on overseas workers, this could initially result in cost-cutting elsewhere in the business.
Finally, the gradual end to sponsorship for social care roles is likely to further pressurise the public sector. Given that significant vacancies are reported for social care positions, this proposal has faced much criticism.
The tone is more welcoming for a ‘highly prized cohort’ of exceptional talent, including entrepreneurs and leaders in specialist fields. Fast-track immigration routes will be available for those who can ‘supercharge UK growth in strategic industries’. A higher intake of research interns will be accepted, notably for those working in artificial intelligence.
There are plans to make the Global Talent route more accessible for top scientific and design talent. Also, to support entrepreneurs from UK universities, the Innovator Founder route will be reviewed. Other measures include doubling the number of workers permitted under the Expansion Worker route, a temporary route for overseas businesses to send senior managers or specialist workers to establish a base in the UK.
The High Potential Individual route, which entitles graduates from top-qualifying overseas universities to 24 months’ permission to stay in the UK, is being expanded. While this will involve doubling the number of qualifying universities, the method for assessing benefit is unclear.
Educational institutions will be less able to recruit students internationally if they fail to meet stricter requirements relating to visa refusal, enrolment and course-completion rates. A government levy on higher education provider income from international students has also been proposed.
Contrary to speculation, the graduate route will remain, enabling international graduates of UK universities to be granted temporary permission to stay in the UK. However, their permission period will be reduced from 24 to 18 months.
While more clarity is required, family migration routes will face reforms, including a tightening of the relationship and suitability requirements, as well as additional English and financial requirements for certain dependants of skilled workers.
Controversially, measures will be introduced to limit successful human rights claims, purportedly to prevent confusion or perverse outcomes. This will include narrowing the definition of ‘exceptional circumstances’ and reviewing how Article 8 rules should apply.
The proposed extension for many of the residence period for settlement from five to 10 years will be disruptive and costly for employers and individuals. Shorter residence periods will be allowed for contributions to the UK economy and society.
Recent media reports claim that the planned 10-year residence requirement could operate retrospectively, which will alarm those currently on a five-year route to settlement.
The English language requirement for settlement will also be raised across most routes. While framed as promoting integration, it risks increased family separation and skills shortages in sectors where fluency in English beyond functional levels is not essential.
While the white paper aims to align economic need with reduced reliance of overseas recruitment, the value and necessity of certain types of migration should not be misplaced. The focus on investment in UK training and employment must be carefully managed, with appropriate consultation and effective engagement with stakeholders. New restrictions may otherwise create additional obstacles to growth and compromise vital sectors, such as care and education. Similarly, far-reaching changes across immigration routes require adequate notice and a fully informed consultation.
Finally, it is good to see some forward-looking proposals to attract exceptional talent. Even so, many routes are in need of simplification and flexibility if the UK is to be a global contender for the ‘brightest and best’ internationally.
Zeena Luchowa is a partner at Laura Devine Immigration, London
No comments yet