What is the UK reforms party current policy settled visa status?
Executive summary
Reform UK’s current, public policy on settled status is to abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and replace it with a system of renewable visas that would require migrants — including some who already hold ILR — to reapply every five years under much tougher criteria such as higher salary thresholds and stronger English requirements [1] [2] [3]. The party says some groups would be exempt, but critics and legal analysts warn the proposal is legally and practically fraught and would strip settled rights from hundreds of thousands unless clarified [4] [5] [6].
1. What Reform says it would do: abolish ILR and impose five‑year renewable visas
Reform UK publicly proposes scrapping the current ILR route — the mechanism by which many migrants acquire permanent residence after typically five years — and substituting it with a visa model requiring applicants to reapply every five years and to meet new, stricter standards including much higher pay and advanced English language ability [1] [3] [2]. Party statements and press coverage make clear the intent is to force many who are currently on a pathway to settlement to re‑qualify under these tighter rules or lose status [7] [2].
2. Who Reform says would be affected and who would be exempt
Reform has stated the policy would not apply to people whose rights are protected under the Withdrawal Agreement — notably many EU citizens with settled status — and it has signalled exemptions for some groups such as certain Hong Kong and Ukrainian arrivals, though the party’s public documents leave plenty of detail unspecified [1] [4] [8]. Reporting indicates Reform’s own figures and enforcement mechanics are not fully published; the party’s leadership suggested the measure would prevent roughly 800,000 people becoming eligible for ILR between 2026 and 2030, a figure that opponents and some commentators say is politically motivated and contested [5].
3. The standards Reform would attach: higher salary, advanced English, family limits
Media and legal commentary summarise Reform’s outline: the new visas would carry high salary thresholds, demand advanced English and tighter limits on bringing partners and dependants, and would remove access to benefits for those on the five‑year visa unless naturalised — all designed, the party says, to “tighten” migration and reduce fiscal costs [2] [4] [3]. Exact thresholds, qualifying criteria and transition rules (for those already holding ILR) are either not published in law or remain vague in the party’s public briefings, leaving enforcement and legal compatibility uncertain [2] [3].
4. Practical and legal questions: enforcement, family life and existing rights
Critics — including cross‑party MPs, campaigners and migration experts — argue the proposal raises large legal and logistical problems: how would the state revoke or convert existing ILR without breach of settled rights, what happens to family life and children’s status, and how would the Home Office administer sweeping rollbacks without primary legislation and substantial resources? Opponents call the idea morally and legally questionable and warn of social disruption, while Reform has provided few operational details on implementation or safeguards [5] [6] [2].
5. Political context: contrast with government plans and electoral positioning
Reform’s plan sits to the right of both the government’s own “earned settlement” white paper proposals and Labour’s stated tougher settlement tests; the government’s reforms also seek to lengthen some routes and tighten criteria but do not propose wholesale abolition of ILR as Reform does [9] [10] [11]. Politically, Reform frames the policy as delivering sharp reductions in long‑term migration to court anti‑immigration voters, while opponents characterise it as a populist gambit that could backfire by alienating moderate voters and creating legal chaos [7] [6].
6. Bottom line: a radical proposal with major gaps between headline and detail
Publicly stated Reform policy is clear in headline form: abolish ILR, replace it with five‑year renewable visas with strict financial, language and eligibility tests, and exempt some EU‑settled cohorts — but the party has not published full legal mechanics, transitional protections or enforcement plans, leaving major unanswered questions about feasibility and human impact [1] [4] [2]. Independent analysts and opposition politicians warn that without detailed legislation and clear safeguards the policy would be legally fraught and socially disruptive [5] [6].