Labour’s immigration law policy dashboard

General comment: The Office for Budget Responsibility’s most recent forecast from March 2024 suggests that net migration should settle at around 350,000 per year over the next five years, taking into account the impact of the Conservatives’ current immigration policies. This is without any further intervention to reduce the figures. The next Government should carefully consider the specifics its policies on net migration for various reasons, including that:

• The net fiscal impact of 350,000 annual net migration is anticipated to be a net reduction in public sector borrowing of approximately £7.4 billion by 2028-2029, which would help to improve (rather than damage) public sector finances; and
• A high proportion of the net migration figure are international students. The Migration Advisory Committee has recently observed that their tuition fees help to expand the range of courses offered while making up for financial losses on domestic students and research. They are increasingly participating as a short-term labour supply for UK businesses, both as Students and Graduate route participants.

General comment: The October 2023 immigration application fee increases and April 2024 rises to salary thresholds for the Skilled Worker route have effectively priced out most roles below graduate level, as well individuals who are early in their career in graduate roles. While this may contribute to a reduction in net migration, it will also exacerbate skills shortages in certain sectors, including hospitality, retail and construction. The next UK Government should pause to take stock of this effect and ideally should consider more nuanced sector and regional-based policies rather than applying blanket measures. The logic and composition of the Immigration Salary List should be reviewed as a priority, as recommended by the Migration Advisory Committee.

General comment: When Carers and Senior Carers became eligible for sponsorship in February 2022, this produced a large spike in Health and Care visa entry clearance grants. Grants in this route are now below the level they were before this introduction, suggesting that there is a cooling of overall take-up of Health and Care in non-carer occupations. The Home Office has also recognised that the availability of sponsorship for Carers and Senior Carers has led to abuse of the sponsorship arrangements by unscrupulous employers and to exploitation of migrant workers.

The next UK Government should consider:

• Investigating and addressing the exploitation of migrant labour in the care sector, including whether this may be exacerbated by the ban on accompanying family members;
• Investigating and addressing the exploitation of migrant labour in the health and care sector more generally; and
• Analysing whether more liberal short-term immigration measures are required to assist the NHS and other health and care providers to address skills shortages, while also taking steps to improve training and retention of workers (both domestic and migrant) within the UK’s health and care system.

General comment: The cost and administration for touring between the UK and Europe has increased for many performers post-Brexit, so more facilitative immigration provisions could benefit this industry, as argued in the report published by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Music, Let the Music Move - A New Deal for Touring.

General comment: An EU-UK youth mobility scheme of the type recently proposed for consideration by the EU may have significant implications for increasing net migration numbers and would be considerably more liberal than the arrangements in place for other participating countries. It is therefore unlikely to be entertained by the next UK Government, although a significantly slimmed-down version may not be dismissed altogether.

Expansion of the Youth Mobility Route more generally could assist with addressing labour shortages in areas including hospitality and leisure, retail and childcare (including au pair work). The fact this route is unsponsored and used by young people choosing to combine work and cultural experience means the profile of migrant is less likely to be subject to worker exploitation.

General comment: While measures to maintain the UK agricultural sector’s capacity to produce food for domestic consumption and export are important for meeting food security needs, so is safeguarding the welfare of the people working in the industry, including migrant workers.

The current Government introduced a minimum 32-hour week guarantee for Seasonal Workers in April 2023 and has stated the welfare of migrant workers is being monitored at a higher level than previously. However, currently the role of the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner is vacant, and recommendations relating to migrant workers from the Horticultural Sector Committee in their report, Sowing the seeds: a blooming English horticultural sector should be considered for taking forward to better protect Seasonal Workers UK-wide.

General comment: When setting Government policies on international students, tensions will continue to exist between seeing international students as an important export earner and generator of soft power for the UK on the one hand, and a contributor to net migration figures on the other. A more joined-up policy across Government departments will be important for ensuring a coherent approach and messaging for international students, and for Government advisers such as the Migration Advisory Committee to make recommendations on immigration policy for this cohort.

General comment: The UK is currently ranked 55th out of 56 countries surveyed under the Migrant Integration Policy Index for ease of family reunification and integration. The next Government could be more ambitious than simply reviewing the minimum income requirement by committing to take a more wide-ranging review of the family routes in terms of the overall social and economic benefits and costs of family reunification. This route could also benefit from a review of visa application fees in terms of their lack of affordability for families, particularly in relation to the ten-year route to settlement.

General comment: There are ongoing concerns regarding the administration of the EU Settlement Scheme, including on whether it operates in compliance with the Brexit Withdrawal Agreements.

Although enhancements to the scheme have been agreed following legal action by the Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements, some of these are not yet implemented, for example a process for automatically considering settled status eligibility and changes to right to work and right to rent checks for pre-settled status holders.

The systems for eligibility-checking scheme participants and for them to prove their status are inexact and contain errors that may lead to real-world detriments for participants. The next Government will need to grapple with these issues, particularly due to the fact many pre-settled status holders’ initial five-year permission will be coming up for ‘expiry’ within the next couple of years.

General comment: EU Settlement Scheme participants were the first cohort of migrants to be granted digital immigration status and have reported significant problems with being able to prove their status when travelling, proving their right to work, proving their right to rent and accessing Government services such as the NHS.

The next Government should take the opportunity to review the experiences of these participants and pause to ensure the problems with existing systems are rectified before taking any further actions to phase out physical immigration documents. In the interim, it should also consider providing physical immigration documents to existing digital visa holders, including EU Settlement Scheme participants.

General comment: In their 2023 review of the Shortage Occupation List, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) recommended that where asylum seekers are granted work rights, these should either be in any occupation or alternatively in any job eligible for sponsorship under the Skilled Worker route. The Immigration Salary List contains substantially fewer occupations than the Shortage Occupation list did, so constitutes an even more restrictive policy than the one that the MAC recommended liberalising.

General comment: Steep increases in UK immigration fees have already been implemented since October 2023. The Immigration Health Surcharge also rose significantly from February 2024. The next Government may wish to evaluate the impact of these recent changes before planning any further upward or downward adjustments.

General comment: The ECHR has broad application beyond the immigration context so withdrawal from this should not be contemplated without a full evaluation of the full implications for human rights and political freedoms in the UK.