
Would would be the effect of the Conservative migration policy?
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has proposed making it more difficult for new immigrants to be able to permanently settle in the UK.She says her party wants to double the time it takes for new migrants to qualify for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) status from five years to 10 years.In addition, the Tories say they would tighten the conditions on people applying for ILR.Applicants would have to show they have not claimed benefits or used social housing and that their household has been a net contributor to the UK economy, meaning they pay more in tax than they take out in services.In addition, those with a criminal record would be disqualified.The Conservatives say these measures are part of their proposals for "urgent action to control our border".BBC Verify has examined how many immigrants these proposals - if enacted - would likely affect.We've also looked at whether the plans would be likely to reduce immigration to the UK.
What is indefinite leave to remain and how many get it?
Most new immigrants come to the UK on visas - such as work visas, family reunification visas or student visas - which come with restrictions on what they can do.They are not generally allowed to access welfare benefits or vote in general elections.They also have to pay special taxes such as the immigration health surcharge, which is currently up to £1,035 per year.When an individual attains IRL - also known as settled status - they can access state benefits and use the NHS without extra charges.They can also sponsor immigration applications in order to enable an overseas relative, such as a spouse, to come to the UK.Most people have to have lived at least five years in the UK to apply for the status.Official data from the Home Office shows there were around 120,000 grants of settled status in 2023.That's roughly double the numbers awarded the status in 2016 and the data for the first three quarters of 2024 points to a further increase last year.The total numbers, however, are still below 2011, when there were 167,000 ILR grants.
How many would the benefits restrictions affect?
The vast majority of new migrants who come on visas are already ineligible to claim benefits or apply for social housing under a visa condition called "No Recourse To Public Funds" (NRPF).The Home Office does not record the exact number of people who hold visas with this condition but it estimated that it applied to about 3.3 million people at the end of 2023.However, there are some exceptions.Those who had their permission granted to stay in the UK on the basis of family or private life, or who hold British National Overseas visas (which applies to post-2021 immigrants from Hong Kong) can apply to have the restriction lifted.That can only happen if the applicant can prove it is necessary for reasons of financial hardship or child welfare.There were 3,759 applications to lift the NRPF condition for destitution reasons in the year ending December 2024, according to the latest Home Office figures.There were 2,217 decisions made in the same period, and of those just over half (1,246) were approved.Such individuals could, in theory, ultimately be denied ILR under the Conservatives' plans.Asylum seekers also do not have recourse to public funds, but they do have access to state-provided accommodation and limited financial support. Asylum seekers are currently not normally permitted to work while their claim is being processed.
How many would the 'net contribution' restrictions affect?
The shadow home secretary Chris Philp clarified on Thursday how the Conservative policy on ILR applicants needing to show a net contribution to the UK economy would work.He told the BBC: "There will be a salary level that we say above that salary level you are likely to be making a net contribution. For people with dependants that salary level will be a bit higher."He did not specify what the salary level would be or how much higher it would be for people with dependants.The Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimates that around half of UK individuals are in households that are net contributors, meaning they pay more in direct and indirect taxes than they receive in cash benefits and benefits in kind, such as school for their children.It does not provide a breakdown showing the proportion of pre-settlement immigrants with this status.
However, it's possible that the share of recent immigrant households in this category will be higher, given that most are unable to claim benefits.The fact that retired households are more likely to be net recipients according to the ONS, while immigrant households are more likely to be of working age, is another reason a higher share of immigrant households might be net contributors than the national average.In recent years, the employment rate of working-age migrant men (82%) was higher than that of the UK-born (78%).It's possible a household net contributor requirement could affect larger numbers of people on family visas (as opposed to work visas) meaning they might not qualify for ILR.But failing to get ILR doesn't necessarily mean these individuals would be required to leave the UK. Some could stay with "limited leave to remain" but without settled status.
How many would the crime restrictions affect?
There are no official crime figures that are broken down by the immigration status of the perpetrators or alleged perpetrators.But we do know about the number of foreign nationals held in prison.There were 10,355 foreign offenders held in custody at the end of last year, making up 12% of the total prison population in England and Wales.However, there are already criminal background checks on people applying for IRL, so the Conservative proposals to disqualify those immigrants who have committed crimes should not, in practice, make a difference.
Would all this reduce immigration?
Net migration into the UK - immigration minus emigration - hit a record 906,000 in the year to June 2023 and was an estimated 728,000 the following year, according to the ONS.It's possible that some people might be deterred, in future, from coming to the UK in the first place if it were harder for them to get ILR, but many migration experts are sceptical that making it harder to claim settled status would have a major impact on these flows.They point out that a majority of people coming into the UK on visas in recent decades did not ultimately claim ILR in any case.Between 2004 and 2012, less than a third had applied for and received ILR.
"I wouldn't anticipate a large impact on net migration, though there could be some effect at the margins," says Madeleine Sumption of the Migration Observatory.However, the Conservatives have also, separately, pledged to impose a "strict numerical cap" on immigration if they returned to power.Additional reporting by Chris Jeavans, Phil Leake and Yaya Egwaikhide
What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
15 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Rachel Reeves' spending splurge plans are ALREADY in chaos after GDP fell 0.3% in April - fuelling fears she WILL have to hike taxes
' spending plans have already been thrown into chaos today after figures showed the economy tumbling into the red. GDP was down 0.3 per cent in April, worse than analysts had expected, and raising more questions about the realism of the Chancellor's splurge on services. Although UK plc has still grown over the past three months, evidence has been mounting of a slowdown. Ms Reeves admitted the data - which coincide with the huge national insurance tax raid on businesses taking effect - were 'disappointing'. ONS Director of Economic Statistics Liz McKeown said: 'The economy contracted in April, with services and manufacturing both falling. However, over the last three months as a whole GDP still grew, with signs that some activity may have been brought forward from April to earlier in the year. 'Both legal and real estate firms fared badly in April, following a sharp increase in house sales in March when buyers rushed to complete purchases ahead of changes to Stamp Duty. Car manufacturing also performed poorly after growing in the first quarter of the year. 'In contrast April was a strong month for construction, research and development and retail, with increases in these only partially offsetting falls elsewhere. 'After increasing for each of the four preceding months, April saw the largest monthly fall on record in goods exports to the United States with decreases seen across most types of goods, following the recent introduction of tariffs.' In the Spending Review yesterday, Ms Reeves set out plans to 'invest' a staggering £4trillion to fund 'the renewal of Britain'. She said the plans, which include another huge dollop of cash for the NHS, would end the 'destructive' austerity of the last government and boost economic growth. Labour strategists hope the costly gamble will pay off by cutting hospital waiting lists, improving the creaking infrastructure and pump-priming the economy. But experts warned the scale of the spending, coupled with the deteriorating public finances, would force another round of damaging tax rises this autumn. The Conservatives accused Ms Reeves of adopting a reckless 'spend now, tax later' approach. The Chancellor insisted her plans could be funded by the eye-watering tax rises she imposed last year. She refused to rule out tax rises this autumn, saying only that taxes 'won't have to go up to pay for what's in this Spending Review'. But the small print of yesterday's Treasury document already includes one significant new tax hike, with the Chancellor pencilling in council tax hikes that will add more than £350 to an average Band D bill by 2029 to help fund local services and the police. Asked to rule out further tax rises, Treasury minister Emma Reynolds said: 'I'm not ruling it in, I'm not ruling it out.'


The Herald Scotland
43 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
The BBC is helping Reform - and has become a danger to democracy
You might not know it - as the national broadcaster, the source of most information for most of Britain has singularly failed to report it - but the BBC has drawn up plans to win over Reform voters. It's strange how the BBC, a channel of staggering narcissism which never misses a chance to talk about itself, isn't saying much about the leaking of minutes from a meeting of its Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee. Read more The story was broken by the Byline Times, one of Britain's 'new media' outlets that's increasingly proving to be an excellent source of investigative journalism. BBC Director-General Tim Davie and other senior figures like 'News CEO' Deborah Turness want to reshape the broadcaster to appeal to Reform voters. They believe BBC news and drama is causing 'low trust issues' among the radical right. Turness discussed altering 'story selection' and 'other types of output, such as drama' to win Reform hearts and minds The committee includes former GB News executive Robbie Gibb, appointed to the BBC board by Boris Johnson. Emily Maitlis once called him an 'active agent of the Conservative Party'. Minutes stated that bosses 'recognised the importance of local BBC teams in the plan, given their closeness to audiences'. So keep an eye on how BBC Scotland behaves from now on. Here's the bottom line: the BBC should not seek to appeal to anyone. It should report the news with complete objectivity, impartiality, and political neutrality. The words 'without fear or favour' should be tattooed on the heart of every BBC employee, especially the cosseted, overpaid establishment mandarins who run the organisation. We pay their wages. The BBC should represent Britain in its entirety, not favoured special interest groups. However, this courting of Reform proves impartiality to be a lie. It doesn't matter if Marxists or Nazis like a particular story. It's irrelevant whether coverage makes liberals happy or conservatives sad, or vice versa. No consideration should ever be paid to whether drama is perceived as progressive or reactionary. What matters is that news is reported accurately and fairly, analysis is balanced, and drama has cultural merit and entertains. By attempting to woo Reform, the BBC alienates everyone else. Worse, the BBC reinforces the grievances levelled against it. Scotland's Yes movement has accused the BBC of bias for years. Now independence supporters can continue to do so but with ammunition to back up their allegations. How can the BBC pretend to report news honestly, or reflect British politics and culture fairly, when it has been caught out cosying up to Nigel Farage? BBC Director-General Tim Davie with former Conservative PM David Cameron (Image: free) The BBC slits its own throat. And many of its enemies will gleefully watch the blood spill. Specifically, Farage. He has consistently attacked the BBC. Indeed, he uses his own platform - the disgracefully biased GB News - to do so. With delicious irony, Farage previously accused the BBC of being a 'political actor'. Well, now the broadcaster appears to be acting politically for its nemesis. Farage threatened to boycott the BBC, and claimed editors used 'story selection' to bash Reform. If Farage ever takes power he'll gut the BBC in an afternoon. In truth, the BBC deserves all it gets. It made Farage's career, endlessly platforming him, giving him far higher exposure than other comparative politicians. If you think there's any fairness to BBC coverage ask yourself how much you see the LibDems on air compared to Reform. Then look at the two parties and their parliamentary representation. Reform has five MPs, the LibDems 72. Indeed, the Greens have four. Do the Greens get four-fifths of the time devoted to Reform? Do they hell. Only last month, Davie, the director-general, was sounding off about the 'crisis of trust' in Britain. He grandly claimed the BBC would play a leading role in reversing the decline and help combat division. The BBC would create a future where 'trusted information strengthens democracy'. Davie, though, is doing everything he can to deepen division, damage democracy and foment distrust in journalism at a time when society needs good, honest reporting more than ever. When he said 'reform' was needed, it now appears Davie meant with a capital R. Currently, Reform is causing chaos in councils the party won at the English local elections. Will that be reported under the new pro-Reform BBC guidelines? I'm afraid we now need to ask ourselves whether the BBC will tip the next election for Reform. Davie should go, along with the entire BBC board. They disgrace journalism, and are not impartial or balanced. Read more The notion of politicising drama is disgusting. Artists exist to create and enrich our lives, not do the bidding of tawdry media executives in hock to the hard-right. In Britain, trust is at rock bottom. New findings released yesterday from the National Centre for Social Research found that just 19% of us believe the current system of governing Britain works. Only 12% trust governments to put country before party. As long as I've been alive, the BBC was billed as the last redoubt for fairness and balance. Over the last decade, that claim has well and truly undergone an acid bath. Now, the mask is off. The BBC has shown us what it really is, and we need to take notice. Globally, the rise of the hard-right has caused many to lose their minds - from commentators and business leaders, to political parties and academics. In Britain, the BBC hasn't just suffered a nervous breakdown, it has completely surrendered its principles of fairness. It's now more a danger to our democracy than a line of defence. Neil Mackay is the Herald's Writer-at-Large. He's a multi-award winning investigative journalist, author of both fiction and non-fiction, and a filmmaker and broadcaster. He specialises in intelligence, security, crime, social affairs, cultural commentary, and foreign and domestic politics


Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Acorn project funding uncertainty as 'final decision' still to be made by Chancellor Rachel Reeves
Concerns have emerged over how much funding the Chancellor will hand over for the Acorn project. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... North Sea bosses have welcomed the UK government finally pledging to back Scotland's carbon capture project after years of delay - but concerns have been raised after it emerged a final investment decision is still to be made. Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed in her spending review that the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, based at St Fergus near Peterhead, will receive funding from the Treasury. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Keir Starmer's government has finally pledged funding for the Acorn project at the St Fergus gas terminal hear Peterhead (Photo by Jeff) | Getty Images But buried in the detail, the Treasury has confirmed that 'a final investment decision will be taken later this parliament, subject to project readiness and affordability'. This has led to a warning over 'investor uncertainty' if a final decision for the Acorn project is not taken 'urgently'. The Acorn project, made up of several firms including Shell, Harbour Energy and Storegga, will, in theory, take harmful carbon emissions and prevent them from being released into the atmosphere and instead buried under the seabed off the Aberdeenshire coast. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There are also plans to repurpose an existing oil and gas pipeline to potential transport carbon from Grangemouth to the offshore storage sites. The Scottish Government has commissioned a report into whether this is possible, but has not yet published that work. The previous Conservative UK government had only granted the Acorn project 'reserved' status and favoured projects south of the Border for full early funding. But the Chancellor told the House of Commons she was announcing 'support for the Acorn project', adding that it will 'support Scotland's transition from oil and gas to low-carbon technology". Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Pressed over how much investment will be allocated by the UK government, Ms Reeves simply said that 'we are putting money into Acorn'. As well as indicating support for the Acorn project, the Chancellor also pledged to back the Viking project south of the Border. David Whitehouse, Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) CEO, said: 'The support for the next phase of carbon storage projects in Scotland and Humberside is welcome, and an important step towards final investment decisions later in this parliament. OEUK's chief executive, David Whitehouse | OEUK 'Together Viking and Acorn have the potential to unlock over £25 billion of investment by 2035, creating over 30,000 jobs at peak construction.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He added: 'These projects will provide the pathway to support the decarbonisation of UK industries and are critical to the government's clean power objectives. We will continue to work with government to detail the long-term support required to deliver these projects and unlock the UK's wider CCS ambitions.' Trade unions have also welcomed the vow to back the Acorn project. STUC general secretary, Roz Foyer, said: 'Following years of Tory failure to invest in carbon capture and storage, this funding is welcome. STUC general secretary Roz Foyer | Andrew Milligan/PA Wire 'The UK and Scottish governments must now work with the relevant unions to ensure that the project maximises the opportunity to create and retain high quality, unionised jobs.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sara Thiam, chief executive of development body, Prosper, said that 'advancing development' in the Acorn project was 'a welcome step', but she warned that 'final confirmation for the project is urgently required to reduce investor uncertainty'. Environmental campaigners have repeatedly raised concerns about the reliance on carbon capture to meet emissions goals, despite independent watchdogs, the Climate Change Committee, suggesting net zero targets cannot be hit without the technology. There are concerns about the reliability of carbon capture technology which is yet to be proven at commercial scale. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Friends of the Earth Scotland's climate campaigner, Alex Lee, branded the project 'a fossil fuel polluters pipe dream' that 'will never live up to the hype'. They added: 'Carbon capture has received billions in funding around the world and it has never worked properly.