**
Recent proposals from the Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, threaten to significantly alter the immigration landscape for families in the UK, particularly those who are already navigating the complexities of in-work benefits. With plans that could double the wait time for settled status to an alarming 20 years for those who have accessed public funds, many families are expressing deep concerns over the potential ramifications.
Migration Policies Under Scrutiny
The charity Ramfel has been at the forefront of discussions surrounding these proposed changes, engaging with families who fear they will be forced to forgo essential benefits—such as child benefit, universal credit, and disability assistance—just to avoid punitive measures. Currently, over 200,000 individuals are on a 10-year path to settled status, necessitating the renewal of visas multiple times, each costing approximately £3,908.50, including healthcare fees. However, the new proposals could drastically alter this route, with families facing a choice between financial support and a secure immigration status.
Nick Beales, Ramfel’s head of campaigning, articulated the dire consequences of these proposals, stating that they would compel parents to work excessive hours while simultaneously driving children into poverty. “Our research reveals that penalising migrant parents for needing state support will have a devastating impact on racialised British children,” he stated. He urged the government to reconsider its stance, emphasising that genuine efforts to end child poverty must include all children, irrespective of their parents’ immigration status.
Increased Insecurity and Inequality
AdviceUK, the UK’s largest network of independent advisers, has echoed these sentiments, arguing that the proposed “fairer pathway to settlement” creates additional layers of insecurity for migrants. The consultation on these proposals closed on 12 February, with changes expected to be implemented by April, potentially with retroactive effects.
The new rules stipulate that while there may be reductions in the baseline qualifying period for settled status—considering factors such as English proficiency or volunteer work—any reductions would be overshadowed by penalties for those who have accessed public funds, increasing the wait time for many families. This uncertainty is already causing alarm among parents who fear that their career prospects and mental health could suffer due to the prolonged wait for indefinite leave to remain (ILR).
One anonymous parent encapsulated the plight of many by stating, “It’s like you have to choose between settlement and surviving. It’s ridiculous.” The emotional and financial toll of navigating this system has left families feeling cornered, as they grapple with the fear of homelessness and increased debt while trying to secure their future.
Stories from the Ground
The experiences of individual families highlight the severe impact of these proposals. Take Julia, a carer and mother of three, who is just a year away from qualifying for ILR. In a bid to avoid a potential 20-year wait for settlement, she has opted to cancel all benefits she is entitled to, including housing benefit and universal credit. “It feels so unfair that I accessed benefits because I’m on a low wage, and now that is being used against me,” she lamented.
A survey conducted by Ramfel with 68 parents from West African, South Asian, and Caribbean backgrounds revealed that 90% of the 51 contributors using public funds would willingly relinquish these benefits to avoid penalties. This stark choice exposes the harsh realities these families face—between immediate survival and long-term stability.
Ramfel’s report highlights that of the 134 children referenced in the survey, over 50% are British citizens, underscoring the inequity of a two-tier settlement system that disproportionately punishes lower-income families.
A Call for Compassionate Policy
As these discussions unfold, Shabana Mahmood emphasised the necessity of contribution and integration in her November consultation launch, stating that permanent residency is a privilege that must be earned. However, the implementation of such policies raises critical questions about the values underpinning the UK’s immigration system.
Why it Matters
These proposed changes represent a significant shift in the UK’s approach to immigration, placing vulnerable families in an untenable position where they must choose between essential support and their future security. The potential for increased hardship among migrant families highlights the urgent need for a compassionate reassessment of policies that impact not only immigrants but also their British children. As society grapples with the complexities of integration and support, the voices of those affected must remain at the forefront of this critical debate.
