Farage’s migrant-benefits plan would abolish ILR and push five-year visas

LONDON — Nigel Farage’s Reform party on Sunday unveiled a sweeping plan to overhaul the UK’s immigration system, including the abolition of Indefinite Leave to Remain and the replacement of most settlement routes with a renewable five-year work visa, a package the party says could curb welfare costs and reduce reliance on foreign workers.

Under the plan, the government would abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) for anyone applying after enactment. Those already granted ILR would face the prospect of converting to new, five-year visas or leaving if they cannot meet the new criteria. Applicants would be required to secure employment in roles meeting higher wage or skill thresholds, demonstrate English proficiency, and limit the number of dependants. In sectors with large vacancies, such as social care and healthcare, Reform would open Acute Skills Shortage Visas, but employers would be obliged to pay a levy to train a native worker in the same role. The policy would also restrict access to benefits, with only UK citizens eligible to claim them, and those who cannot obtain a new visa or who hold ILR without a qualifying visa potentially facing removal. Reform says it would not scrap UK citizenship that has already been granted, but questions remain about how pensioners and others who previously held ILR would be treated.

Reform’s leadership argues the plan would deliver substantial taxpayer savings by cutting the welfare bill and by reducing the supply of low-wage migrant labor in favor of native workers. Farage has claimed the policy would generate large fiscal gains, though the party has faced scrutiny over how savings are calculated and whether the figures are still valid under evolving definitions used by budget watchdogs. Zia Yusuf, Reform’s head of policy, stressed that the proposal would not scrap EU settled status outright but would seek negotiations with Brussels on eligibility for benefits, risking friction in future talks with the bloc. He also noted that pension rights and citizenship status for those already in the system would remain largely intact, while acknowledging exemptions could be necessary for families or individuals who fled conflict or oppression.

Analysts and researchers provided a mixed backdrop to the plan. The Centre for Policy Studies, which helped popularize the savings figure cited by Reform, has acknowledged later revisions to definitions used in budget assessments, calling the exact amount subject to interpretation. Oxford University researchers estimate that roughly 430,000 non-EU citizens were granted ILR in the past two decades, though it is unclear how many have since emigrated. Reform also argued that another 800,000 recent arrivals under the previous Conservative government would be eligible for ILR by the end of the decade if the current rules remained in place, a number it says would be offset by the new regime. The government’s own data on how many foreign nationals receive the state pension or disability benefits is not published in a way that clarifies the total impact of ILR reform, according to Reform.

The plan drew immediate political reaction. Trade unions criticized the proposal; the Royal College of Nursing described the prospect of removing thousands of migrant healthcare staff as “abhorrent beyond words.” Critics warned that the legal and practical hurdles to scrapping ILR—such as potential challenges under European human rights law and international conventions—could complicate or derail any bid to implement the policy. Supporters, however, framed the move as a necessary step to retool Britain’s labor market, reduce welfare dependency, and reassert control over immigration policy.

The policy stance adds to a broader debate about migration, welfare, and sovereignty in UK politics. Farage’s team characterized the plan as a bold attempt to recalibrate incentives around settlement, work, and benefits, while acknowledging that questions about feasibility, legal alignment, and administrative logistics would need careful handling in any future government. The coming weeks are expected to see detailed debate among policymakers, opposition parties, and industry groups as the specifics of eligibility, enforcement, and transition arrangements are worked through in Parliament.