Earned settlement
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood's statement on earned settlement.
Mr Speaker, with permission, I will make a statement on this government’s policy of earned settlement.
A little over a month ago, at Labour Party Conference, I promised we would adopt a policy on this issue that is guided, above all, by fairness.
Fairness towards those who come here legally and play their part…
And fairness towards British citizens, already here, who should not be asked to bear a greater burden.
Mr Speaker, the question of fairness matters to me because it matters to my family.
Over 50 years ago, my parents came to this country from rural Kashmir.
They came here knowing one thing, above all else:
That they would be treated fairly here.
They came from a place where power was often arbitrary and where the dice were always loaded.
They came to this country because they knew we do things differently here and that we value, above all else, fair play.
Mr Speaker, it is my responsibility to ensure our migration system lives up to that ideal.
I believe doing so depends upon a contract:
Between those who come and those already here.
This country welcomes those who seek a new and better life within it.
But I also know there is an expectation of those who do.
That they will play their part, contribute to their community and become a part of our national life.
I do not think this despite being a Labour politician.
I think this because I am a Labour politician.
If we are to ask our fellow citizens to buy into a system of shared taxation and universal public services, they must know that everyone is playing their part.
Solidarity is the precondition for social justice.
Creating a fair migration system demands reform to settlement: the ability to live in this country forever.
Settlement confers some of the most valuable rights that this country can offer.
At settlement, a migrant receives the right to free education, our NHS, and – should they fall upon it – the welfare state.
Until now, settlement rights have come at 5 years.
Almost exclusively as a result of time spent in this country.
It has therefore been a right accrued with little expectation of responsibility.
I do not believe this represents true fairness.
Instead, I believe these considerable rights should come after responsibilities have been met and a contribution has been made.
Settlement should not be automatic.
It should be earned.
Mr Speaker, today the government publishes a policy called ‘Earned settlement’.
It ensures the period someone must live in this country before they settle is determined by the contribution they have made.
That starts by setting out clearly what we consider to be disqualifying criteria:
Firstly, a criminal record.
Secondly, a failure to speak English to a high standard.
Thirdly, any unpaid debt to the British taxpayer.
And finally, a failure to have made 3 years of national insurance contributions.
This is the foundation of settlement:
The non-negotiable expectations that we make of anyone who seeks to live here permanently.
For those who clear these bars, settlement then varies based on the contribution made rather than simply time served.
This contribution is judged, crucially, not just financially.
But also in terms of public service.
A 5-year path will remain open to all higher earners, on salaries of over £50,000, and those who have contributed in healthcare and education in professions like doctors, nurses and teachers.
For those who make an exceptional contribution, even faster routes are available.
The highest rate taxpayers, earning over £125,000 will, over the course of their lifetime, contribute £1.5 million.
This funds the critical services that many, including the poorest in this country, rely upon.
So under these reforms, they will be able to apply for settlement after 3 years, as will those who arrive on our highest talent schemes.
Everyone else will be placed on a 10-year path, including all those earning less than £50,000.
Settlement will still be available to them.
They will simply have to show a sustained contribution to this country and they will be able to renew their existing, temporary visas until that point.
Conditionality runs both ways.
Those who commit an immigration breach will see settlement pushed back to 20 years.
While those who have claimed benefits must have had 5 continuous years without falling on the state before they make their application.
A number of groups will see their path to settlement remain as today.
These include Hong Kong British Nationals Overseas, members of our armed forces, those with a British connection and those on legacy routes such as Windrush.
Before we finalised this policy, we first took it to the country through a consultation.
Over 200,000 people responded, and I thank them for doing so.
Many of the responses were focused on one particular group – social care workers.
Between 2022 and 2025, 250,000 people – and their dependants – arrived on, or switched into, the social care route.
They came at a time when the sector was under considerable pressure following the COVID-19 pandemic and the unique challenge of that moment.
It is also, however, the case that this route was abused.
[political content redacted]
Delegations were sent across the country to encourage ever more businesses to sponsor foreign workers with little apparent interest in their suitability to do so.
As a result, there was significant abuse of the care route:
Sometimes because of fraudulent and exploitative companies and sometimes because individuals themselves came here knowing there was no job they could fill.
A fair solution must address both sides of this.
Recognising the service of those who cared for our sick and elderly at a time of immense national need and also addressing the abuse that was present on this route.
The government’s solution does so in 2 ways.
Firstly, by providing a 5-year path to settlement for care workers who lived up to the promise they made on coming to this country, worked hard and answered our call when we needed them.
Those who earned £25,000 a year, working in the social care sector which was the condition of their visa, will therefore be able to settle on their existing 5-year path.
The second group, who have not fulfilled the conditions of their visa represent around a quarter of those who came between 2022 and 2025, or switched into this route.
We will offer them a second chance to make the contribution they came to this country to make.
They will be able to apply for another 5-year care visa and they will not be tied to their old employer, allowing those with rogue sponsors to break away from them.
The government has already stripped around 1,800 exploitative employers of their licences.
And we are lifting standards in care with our Fair Pay Agreement across the sector.
The government will now help workers to find a new position with a legitimate provider and we will give them a longer period of time to do so before their existing visa is curtailed.
There remain tens of thousands of legitimate vacancies in the care sector today.
So those who seek a new job in care, and have the requisite skills, should be able to find one.
At the completion of their new 5-year visa, these workers will be able to apply for settlement once more.
Everyone will have a fair shot to make their contribution and no one will be punished for the sins of their employer.
But we will also preserve the critical element of this reform.
That settlement must be linked to contribution.
This same transitional arrangement will be applied to public sector workers in roles identified by the Migration Advisory Committee. In healthcare and education, such as auxiliary nurses.
This country has been highly dependent upon them and their contribution will be recognised.
Mr Speaker, these transitional arrangements apply only to those who joined before this government published the Immigration White Paper in May 2025.
After that point, as our consultation shows, the government’s position of a 10-year path to settlement was widely understood.
These are exceptional exclusions for exceptional circumstances.
And it remains the case that the rules around settlement are determined when a settlement decision is made. Not at the point when someone arrives.
This is a position that is long established in this country.
And it is one that has been tested conclusively in our courts.
Mr Speaker, the responses to our consultation focused also on settlement rights for refugees.
I know the people of this country wish to continue welcoming genuine refugees.
However, I also know there is nothing fair about allowing unsafe and illegal entry into this country.
It is not fair that our borders are run by people smugglers.
It is not fair that women and children are dying in the Channel.
And it is not fair that, after historic levels of illegal arrivals, British citizens are paying £4 billion a year to fund asylum support.
So as we open new safe and legal routes for genuine refugees, we must also discourage dangerous, unsafe and illegal crossings.
Settlement plays a key part in this.
We will place those who come to this country on one of our new safe and legal routes on a 5-year path to settlement.
This is as fast a path as higher earners entering Britain today.
At the same time, we will discourage the use of unsafe and illegal routes.
The standard qualifying period for all refugees who have not come by a safe and legal route will become 20 years.
A further 10 years will be added for those who entered the country by an illegal method, such as by small boat.
We do want to promote integration into this country for all those who are here.
For that reason, those who enter work or study will be able to earn settlement 10 years earlier.
This means a refugee who did not arrive by small boat, who is working or studying, could qualify for settlement at 10 years.
Let us not forget, regardless of the question of settlement:
For as long as a genuine refugee requires protection in this country, we will provide it.
I know the British people’s sense of fair play means they welcome refugees.
And those who seek to contribute to our society once they are here.
But, at the same time, there is nothing fair about incentivising unsafe and illegal routes into this country.
And I will not do that.
These reforms are the right thing to do.
Both morally and financially.
While a full impact assessment will be completed and published as we implement the reforms, our changes ensure those who are net contributors are encouraged to come to this country and stay here.
Meanwhile, the cohort who are most likely to impose a cost at settlement must instead seek work and meet the conditions of their visa before they can apply.
As a result, the Department for Work and Pensions estimates that our reforms will reduce the benefits bill by billions of pounds.
This is a solution that is fair for those who come here legally and play their part…
And fair to British citizens already here, who should not be asked to pay a greater burden.
Mr Speaker, earned settlement institutes a new paradigm in our migration system, long overdue.
That one of our greatest rights that we can offer now depends upon a contribution made and responsibilities met.
The right to live in this country forever must now be earned.
It will no longer be automatic.
It is, Mr Speaker, a fair settlement for all.
And so I commend this statement to the House.