Reform UK, the insurgent political party led by Nigel Farage, has ignited a fierce national debate by pledging to abolish indefinite leave to remain (ILR) for migrants if it wins the next general election. Unveiled in a series of high-profile announcements on September 22 and 23, 2025, the policy would see tens of thousands of people who have settled legally in Britain forced to reapply for their right to stay every five years, under stricter rules. The move, aimed squarely at the so-called "Boriswave" of post-Brexit migrants, has drawn both applause from some corners of the electorate and sharp condemnation from migration experts, charities, and business leaders.
Farage’s proposal is bold, to say the least. Under the plan, indefinite leave to remain—the main route to British citizenship for those who have lived and worked in the UK for five years—would be scrapped entirely. Instead, migrants would be required to reapply for a renewable five-year visa, meeting tougher criteria each time. Those who fail to qualify could face deportation, a prospect that has sent ripples of anxiety through migrant communities and advocacy groups.
According to The Independent, Farage declared, “Half the ‘Boris-wave’ migrants do not work, and never will. At least 800,000 of them will shortly qualify for indefinite leave to remain, which gives them lifetime access to our welfare state. This is a scam on the British people perpetrated by the Tory party. Reform will avert this crisis.” He went on to claim that the policy would save British taxpayers at least £234 billion over the lifetime of these migrants, citing a report by the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) think tank.
That headline savings figure, however, has been roundly disputed. The CPS itself has since distanced from the number, saying that “overall cost estimates should no longer be used” after the Office for Budget Responsibility revised its definitions of some fiscal data in their report. Labour officials were quick to pounce, with party chair Anna Turley arguing, “Farage is unable to say how many families his policy would break up, what the cost to businesses would be, what would happen to pensioners and how long it would take to implement—basic questions that any serious political party would know the answers to before making an announcement like this.”
The backdrop to Reform UK’s announcement is a dramatic shift in UK migration patterns since Brexit. As reported by The Week, net migration surged from 239,000 before Brexit to 906,000 in 2023, before dropping to 431,000 in 2024, according to Office for National Statistics data. The "Boriswave" refers to the sharp increase in legal migration following the introduction of new post-Brexit, points-based visa rules under then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson. While the intention was to "cherry-pick only the best and the brightest," as former Home Secretary Priti Patel put it, the reality was a ballooning of visas for lower-skilled workers, particularly in sectors facing acute labour shortages such as care and hospitality.
Boris Johnson himself, speaking on The Sun’s podcast, admitted he kept migration policy "loose" to ensure there were enough workers to "stack the shelves and fill the petrol stations with petrol." He described how, amid widespread panic over labour shortages, his government lowered qualification and salary thresholds for visas, resulting in the influx now at the heart of the political storm.
Reform UK’s plan would not only prevent new arrivals from gaining settled status but would retroactively apply to those already living in the UK, except for EU citizens with settled status. ITV News noted that this would mean families established in Britain for years could see their status stripped away, likely triggering a wave of legal challenges. The policy would also bar access to benefits or free NHS care for those on the new five-year visas, and raise the salary threshold required to qualify—conditions that would hit lower-paid workers especially hard.
Critics have not held back. Josephine Whitaker-Yilmaz, head of advocacy at the charity Praxis, warned that the proposals would "tank our already-struggling economy, by disrupting the lives of millions of people who’ve been living and working legally in the UK for many years." Nadra Ahmed, executive chair of the National Care Association, said Reform "do not understand the value of social care," highlighting the sector’s reliance on migrant workers. Nicola Ranger, general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, called the plans “abhorrent beyond words,” adding, “These are people who have come to the UK to care for patients and become part of our communities. They deserve so much better than this. It shows neither compassion nor an understanding of the fundamental role our brilliant migrant nursing staff play in health and care. Without them, services would simply cease to function.”
Ben Brindle, a researcher at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, disputed Farage’s claim that half of Boriswave migrants do not work, stating, “It does seem from the existing—patchy—data that more than half are working. As for the ‘will never work’ part of it, I’m not sure what the basis of any prediction about the future would be. Generally we see that employment rates go up over time for the groups who do worse in the labour market, such as family members.”
Sunder Katwala, director of the think tank British Future, added, “Threatening to revoke the settled status of millions who already have indefinite leave is morally wrong, beyond the legal and practical chaos it would cause—it undermines the very idea of belonging in this country.”
There’s also a practical wrinkle: EU citizens would be exempt from the ban on migrants receiving benefits, meaning only 2.7% of universal credit claimants would actually be affected, according to The Independent. This undercuts Reform’s argument that the policy would deliver a dramatic reduction in welfare spending.
Despite its headline-grabbing nature, the proposal faces daunting legal, economic, and logistical hurdles. As ITV News observed, the prospect of mass deportations on this scale would be unprecedented in modern British history and would almost certainly face immediate judicial challenges. Business groups, particularly those in social care and hospitality, are already warning of crippling labour shortages if the plan were ever implemented.
Yet for Farage and Reform UK, the political calculation is clear. With the party enjoying a lead in some opinion polls, their hardline stance on immigration is designed to put pressure on both the government and the opposition—staking out ground to the right of the Conservatives and capitalizing on voter unease about migration and its effects on public services.
Whether the policy is ever enacted remains to be seen. But in the high-stakes world of British politics, Reform UK’s proposal has succeeded in putting migration back at the heart of the national conversation—forcing rivals to respond and ensuring that, for now, the debate over who belongs in Britain, and on what terms, is far from settled.
