Home secretary announced 5-year ILR option for care workers won’t apply to people who arrived after May 2025
Home secretary announced 5-year ILR option for care workers won’t apply to people who arrived after May 2025. Photograph: PRU/AFP/Getty ImagesView image in fullscreenHome secretary announced 5-year ILR option for care workers won’t apply to people who arrived after May 2025. Photograph: PRU/AFP/Getty ImagesFrom 2h agoShabana Mahmood is making her statement now about changes to the indefinite leave to remain rules.
She starts by saying “fairness” is at the heart of this policy.
A little over a month ago at Labour party conference I promised that we would adopt a policy on this issue that is guided, above all, by fairness – fairness towards those who come here legally and play their part, and fairness towards British citizens already here, who should not be asked to bear a greater burden.
The question of fairness matters to me because it matters to my family. Over 50 years ago, my parents came to this country from rural Kashmir. They came here knowing one thing above all else – that they would be treated fairly here. They came from a place where power was often arbitrary and where the dice were always loaded. They came to this country because they knew we do things differently here, and that we value above all else fair play.
Here is the list of “public service” jobs where foreign workers will continue to be able to apply for ILR after five years, as now, instead of having to wait 10 years, which will be the new norm. Anyone earning more than £50,271 will automatically be in this category. But people earning less than that will be included if they are doing one of these jobs.
View image in fullscreenPublic service jobs where foreigner workers will still be able to get ILR after 5 years Photograph: Home OfficeYou will notice that care workers are not on the list.
Under the plans announced last year, care workers were going to be in a special category where they were going to have to wait 15 years for ILR (because of their low income). That idea has been abandoned, and instead they are covered by the new, 10-year norm. (See 4.39pm.)
But Mahmood has announced what she is calling “transitional arrangements” that will apply to most care workers. (See 4.11pm.) The Home Office says:
Care workers who entered, or switched into, the route before publication of the immigration white paper in May 2025 will retain the existing five-year qualifying period for settlement where they meet the applicable salary (£25,000 a year), sponsorship and employment requirements. They will also need to meet the strengthened minimum requirements that will apply generally under earned settlement, including on criminality and English language, unless an exemption applies.
Care workers who arrived before May 2025 who do not meet these criteria will instead be given the chance to apply for a second, five-year visa. (See 4.11pm.)
Labour’s Diane Abbott told Mahmood she was in danger of creating another Windrush scandal. And she complained about the changes being retrospective. She said:
It is right that care workers are exempted from the new arrangements for [indefinite leave to remain]
But for the rest of the workforce, the retrospective nature of these new arrangements still seem to be unfair because you can come in legally, you can work legally and then have your residency rights turned upside down. How can that be fair?
Mahmood said she did not accept that the changes were retrospective.
On indefinite leave to remain and what she calls the retrospective nature of the changes, she will know I do not agree with that characterisation of those changes.
Any government needs to be able to make changes to immigration rules to reflect things that are happening, to reflect abuses that we can see in the system, to also be able to make additional changes based on assessment of numbers and costs.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, responded to Mahmood on behalf of the Conservatives. He claimed she had performed a U-turn that would cost £10bn. (See 11.44am.)
The home secretary now proposes to allow every single care worker and their dependents who arrived prior to May 202 – a number running into hundreds of thousands – to stay in this country to stay in this country beyond the expiry of their visa, and in the case of 75% of them to stay permanently
How is it she can justify allowing people that she acknowledges arrived here fraudulently [to] stay forever, at a cost that she herself has admitted costs £10 billion? That is the cost. That is the cost of today’s U-turn.
Mahmood said her plans would save money, and lead to 500,000 people getting settlement later than planned. She said:
The cohort most likely to impose a cost will now, as a result of my measures, wait longer for settlement.
And that is why the [Department for Work and Pensions] say that these measures will save billions in the benefits bill.
And half a million people, 500,000 people, will settle later as a result of these reforms.
The Home Office has now published its new policy paper on earned settlement.
And here is its summary of the new rules.
View image in fullscreenSummary of new ILR rules Photograph: Home OfficeAnd here are the rules for refugees.
View image in fullscreenSummary of new ILR rules for refugees Photograph: Home OfficeHere is Rajeev Syal and Jessica Elgot’s story about the ILR announcement.
Mahmood said her proposals would cut welfare spending by billions. She said:
These reforms are the right thing to do, both morally and financially.
While a full impact assessment will be completed and published as we implement the reforms, our changes ensure those who are net contributors are encouraged to this country to come to this country and stay here.
Meanwhile, the cohort most likely to impose a cost at settlement must instead seek work and meet the conditions of their visa before they can apply.
As a result, the Department for Work and Pensions estimates that our reforms will reduce the benefits bill by billions of pounds.
Mahmood said refugees would be allowed to access ILR more quickly if they work or study.
We do want to promote integration into this country for all those who are here.
For that reason, those who enter work or study will be able to earn settlement 10 years earlier.
And this means a refugee who did not arrive by small boat, who is working and studying, could qualify for settlement at ten years.
Mahmood confirmed that, as she proposed when she first set out detailed plans last November, migrants arriving in the UK illegally on small boats would have to wait 30 years for settlement.
I know the people of this country wish to continue welcoming genuine refugees. However, I also know that there is nothing fair about allowing unsafe and illegal entry into this country.
It is not fair that our borders are run by people smugglers. It is not fair that women and children are dying in the Channel. And it is not fair that after historic levels of illegal arrivals, British citizens are paying £4bn a year to fund asylum support.
So as we open new safe and legal routes for genuine refugees, we must also discourage dangerous, unsafe and illegal crossings. And settlement plays a key part in this.
We will place those who come to this country on one of our new safe and legal routes on a five-year path to settlement. This is as fast a path as higher earners entering Britain today.
At the same time, we will discourage the use of unsafe and illegal routes, the standard disqualifying period for all refugees who have not come by a safe and legal route will become 20 years.
A further 10 years will be added for those who entered the country by an illegal method, such as by small boat. We do want to promote integration into this country for all those who are here.
Mahmood said the transitional arrangements that she described for care workers (see 4.11pm) would also apply to some other public sector workers.
The same transitional arrangement will be applied to public sector workers in roles identified by the migration advisory committee in healthcare and education, such as auxiliary nurses. This country has been highly dependent upon them and their contribution will be recognised.
These transitional arrangements apply only to those who joined before this government published the immigration white paper in May 2025.
After that point, as our consultation shows, the government’s position of a ten year path to settlement was widely understood.
These are exceptional exclusions for exceptional circumstances, and it remains the case that the rules around settlement are determined when a settlement decision is made, not at the point when someone arrives.
This is a position that is long established in this country, and it is one that has been tested conclusively in our courts.
Mahmood said the government would help care workers who were with exploitative employers find reputable ones instead.
The government has already stripped around 1,800 exploitative employees of their licences, and we are lifting standards in care with our fair pay agreement across the sector.
The government will now help workers to find a new position with a legitimate provider, and we will give them a longer period of time to do so before their existing visa is curtailed.
There remain tens of thousands of legitimate vacancies in the care sector today, so those who seek a new job in care and have the requisite skills should be able to find one.
At the completion of their new five year visa, these workers will be able to apply for settlement once more.
Mahmood went on to specifically explain the rules for care workers. She said:
Between 2022 and 2025, 250,000 people and their dependents arrived on or switched into the social care route. They came at a time when the sector was under considerable pressure following the Covid 19 pandemic and the unique challenge of that moment.
It is also, however, the case that this route was abused. The last Conservative government may have talked of restoring control to our borders, but in truth they lost control entirely.
There never was this more obvious than when the shadow home secretary [Chris Philp] was an immigration minister in the Home Office.
Delegations were sent across the country to encourage ever more businesses to sponsor foreign workers, with little apparent interest in their suitability to do so. As a result, there was significant abuse of the care route, sometimes because of fraudulent and exploitative companies, and sometimes because individuals themselves came here knowing there was no job they could fill.
A fair solution must address both sides of this, recognising the service of those who cared for our sick and elderly at a time of immense national need, and also addressing the abuse that was present on this route.
The government solution does so in two ways.
Firstly, by providing a five-year path to settlement for care workers who lived up to the promise that they made on coming to this country, worked hard and answered our call when we needed them. Those who earn £25,000 a year working in the social care sector, which was the condition of their visa, will therefore be able to settle on their existing five-year path.
The second group, who have not fulfilled the conditions of their visa, represent around a quarter of those who came between 2022 and 2025 or switched into this route. We will offer them a second chance to make the contribution that they came to this country to make. They will be able to apply for another five-year care visa, and they will not be tied to their old employer, allowing those with rogue sponsors to break away from them.
Mahmood said some people would not be affected by the changes.
A number of groups will see their path to settlement remain as today. These include Hong Kong British nationals, overseas members of our armed forces, those with a British connection and those on legacy routes such as Windrush.
Mahmood goes on to give more details of how settlement will be awarded.
For those who clear these bars [see 3.57pm] settlement then varies based on the contribution made rather than simply time served. This contribution is judged crucially, not just financially, but also in terms of public service.
A five year path will remain open to all higher earners on salaries of over £50,000 and those who have contributed in health care and education in professions like doctors, nurses and teachers.
For those who make an exceptional contribution, even faster routes are available. The highest rate taxpayers earning over £125,000 will, over the course of their lifetime, contribute £1.5m, and this funds the critical services that many, including the poorest in these in this country, rely upon. So under these reforms they will be able to apply for settlement after three years, as will those who arrive on our highest talent schemes.
Everyone else will be placed on a 10-year path, including all those earning less than £50,000. Settlement will still be available to them. They will simply have to show a sustained contribution to this country, and they will be able to renew their existing temporary visas until that point.
Conditionality runs both ways. Those who commit an immigration breach will see settlement push back to 20 years, while those who have claimed benefits must have had five continuous years without falling on the state before they make their application.
Mahmood says some people will not qualify for settlement.
[This] starts by setting out clearly what we consider to be disqualifying criteria.
Secondly, a failure to speak English to a high standard.
Thirdly, any unpaid debt to the British taxpayer and, finally, a failure to have made three years of national insurance contributions.
This is the foundation of settlement, the non-negotiable expectations that we make of anyone who seeks to live here permanently.
Mahmood explains why she thinks the rules need to change.
Until now, settlement rights have come at five years, almost exclusively as a result of time spent in this country. It has therefore been a right accrued with little expectation of responsibility.
I do not believe this represents true fairness.
Instead, I believe these considerable rights should come after responsibilities have been met and a contribution has been made.
Settlement should not be automatic. It should be earned.
Today the government publishes a policy called earned settlement. It ensures the period someone must live in this country before they settle is determined by the contribution they have made.
Fox Style News Syndicate. Sourced from broadcast reporting: Read Full Source Coverage.