On September 22, 2025, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage unveiled one of the most sweeping immigration proposals in recent British political memory: the abolition of indefinite leave to remain (ILR) for migrants, including those who have already earned this status. The announcement, made at a press conference in London, sent shockwaves through immigrant communities, business leaders, and political circles alike, igniting a fierce debate over the future of the UK’s immigration system and the lives of hundreds of thousands of people who have made Britain their home.
ILR has long been a cornerstone of the UK’s immigration system. It grants people who have lived and worked in the country—often for five years or more—the right to stay indefinitely, work, study, and access certain benefits. For many, it’s the crucial step before applying for British citizenship. But under Reform UK’s plan, this route would be scrapped entirely. Instead, all migrants—new and existing—would be required to reapply for temporary visas every five years, facing stricter criteria each time.
“We will not only say these people do not qualify for indefinite leave to remain, we will abolish indefinite leave to remain as a category in this country,” Farage declared, according to ITV News. He argued that the current system is “grossly unfair” and a burden on the state, singling out what he called the “Boriswave”—the influx of legal migrants who arrived after Brexit under rules introduced by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Farage estimated that 800,000 people, mostly young and low-skilled, would qualify for ILR over the next three to four years. “Britain is not the world’s food bank,” he said. “It is not for us to provide welfare for people coming in from all over the world.”
Reform UK’s policy would also bar anyone other than British citizens from accessing welfare benefits. Zia Yusuf, the party’s policy chief, explained in the Daily Express that “these changes will lead to hundreds of thousands of people having to apply and ultimately losing their settled status in the UK, which will be done on a staggered and orderly basis to allow businesses to train British workers to replace them.” Yusuf added, “Many of those who will lose their leave to remain are entirely dependent on the welfare state and will leave voluntarily upon losing access to benefits. Those that don’t will be subject to immigration enforcement as part of our mass deportation programme.”
The new scheme, according to BBC News, would not only affect new arrivals but also those who have already secured ILR—potentially upending the lives of hundreds of thousands. Applicants would have to meet higher salary thresholds (reportedly as high as £60,000, compared to the current skilled worker visa requirement of £41,700), demonstrate advanced English, and face new restrictions on bringing family members. Those seeking citizenship would see the minimum residency period rise from six to seven years and be required to renounce any other citizenships.
Reform UK claims these changes would save the country £234 billion over several decades, a figure sourced from a Centre for Policy Studies report. However, as The Guardian and BBC both note, this estimate has been withdrawn by the think tank itself after the Office for Budget Responsibility challenged its accuracy. When pressed, Farage insisted the figure was “without a doubt too low,” but admitted the “exact figure” was not known due to gaps in available data.
The policy does carve out some exceptions. EU citizens with settled status under the European Union Withdrawal Agreement would not be affected, though Yusuf hinted that the party would seek to negotiate changes to welfare entitlements for EU nationals drawing universal credit. However, Farage refused to clarify whether the proposals would apply to refugees from Ukraine and Hong Kong who arrived under special government schemes, leaving many in limbo.
The announcement drew swift and sharp criticism from across the political spectrum. London Mayor Sadiq Khan condemned the plan, stating, “Thousands of Londoners have indefinite leave to remain. They have legal rights and are our friends, neighbours and colleagues, contributing hugely to our city. Threatening to deport people living and working here legally is unacceptable.”
Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, called Reform UK “a threat to our democracy, to things we hold dear, British values—decency, tolerance, respect for the rule of law.” The party’s spokesperson warned that “businesses would be thrown into disarray, and the UK would lose billions in economic growth and tax revenues.” Labour’s chair, Anna Turley, dismissed the plan as “unfunded, unworkable and falling apart in real time,” arguing that Reform UK relied on “discredited numbers” and had no answers for basic questions such as the impact on families, pensioners, or the cost to businesses.
The government, too, was quick to distance itself from Reform’s approach. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the suggested savings “have no basis in reality” and pointed out that the government was already consulting on plans to double the waiting period for ILR from five to ten years and tighten access to welfare for migrants. Conservative shadow housing secretary James Cleverly remarked that he was “far from convinced that the savings are where Nigel Farage said they’re going to be,” and accused Reform of merely “catching up” with existing government plans to restrict indefinite settlement for those claiming benefits.
Reform UK’s announcement comes at a time when immigration remains a deeply contentious issue in British politics. Much of the increase in legal migration since Brexit has been attributed to schemes for refugees from Ukraine, Hong Kong, and Afghanistan, as well as looser post-Brexit rules. Labour has already proposed its own toughening of ILR requirements, suggesting most applicants should be in the UK for 10 years before applying, though a Labour source disputed claims that most ILR holders rely on benefits, citing government figures that only about 16% of all foreign claims come from this group.
Meanwhile, Reform UK has promised to expand migration routes for entrepreneurs and investors and to introduce an Acute Skills Shortage Visa (ASSV) scheme, which would require firms to train a British worker for every foreign hire in crisis-hit sectors. The party’s proposals have been pitched as bringing Britain in line with countries such as the US and the UAE, but critics say the comparison is misleading and the disruption to families, businesses, and communities would be immense.
As the dust settles on Reform UK’s announcement, one thing is clear: the debate over the future of immigration in Britain is far from over. The party’s bold—and, to some, alarming—proposals have exposed deep divisions about what it means to belong, contribute, and call the UK home. For the hundreds of thousands of people whose futures now hang in the balance, the coming months will be watched with a mixture of anxiety and hope.
