Britain could make migrants wait up to 20 years to settle – making it one of the longest waiting times in the world

As far as refugees are concerned, this could create a situation that is unprecedented in similar countries.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood plans to double the period of eligibility for indefinite leave for most immigrants from five to 10 years, and extend the period for some immigrants to 20 years.

Eligibility requirements will also be tightened. Immigration requires a clean criminal record, higher English language standards and an annual income of more than £12,570 for at least three years.

This will have a disproportionate impact on those least likely to be in full-time work, including dependents of people on work visas, family visa holders and refugees.

The ten-year settlement basis will be adjusted up or down based on individual circumstances. For example, highly skilled workers, including NHS nurses and doctors, or those earning more than £125,140, ​​could qualify after five or three years respectively.

Those who hold family visas or are deemed to be working to “integrate” (such as volunteering in the community) may become eligible after five to seven years. Those who apply for benefits will have to wait up to 20 years, while those who entered illegally or overstayed their visas will have to wait up to 30 years to settle.

For low-skilled workers, the qualification period will begin at 15 years. For refugees, it is 20, which cannot be reduced unless the person works or studies. In this case, their status will be converted to a protected work and study visa, which will be reviewed every 30 months.

The government says the growing number of people getting settled is one of the driving forces behind the reforms. The number has been rising since 2017, reaching 163,000 in the year ending June 2025. The Home Office expects this number to increase significantly over the next five years.

These reforms are also considered a response to irregular migration. Citing the Danish model as inspiration, the UK government argued that a longer timeframe would “strongly deter” undocumented arrivals and reduce the “pull factors” attracting people to the UK.

However, research shows that such deterrence-based policies are a weak tool for reducing migration: migration decisions depend primarily on conditions in the country of origin rather than rights in the country of destination.

The Home Office claims the amendments do not require legislation, meaning they do not need to be put to a vote in Parliament. But opponents have signaled their intention to force a symbolic vote to make their point clear. Most concerns relate to plans to apply changes retroactively.

international outlier

The proposals would make the UK an outlier compared with other major economies. In the EU, the closest thing to ILR is long-term residence status for third-country nationals.

This requires people to live in the EU with a valid visa for at least five years and grants long-term residency under limited conditions. This exists in parallel with national programs such as the Permesso di Soggiorno UE per soggiornanti di lungo periodo in Italy and the Niederlassungserlaubnis in Germany, both of which follow a similar approach.

Denmark and Ireland are the only two EU member states to opt out of the EU-level plan. These countries have special arrangements for immigration and asylum policies. They set the thresholds at eight and five years respectively, with Denmark reducing this to four years in some cases.

The British government claims that temporary refugee status and extended periods of permanent residence have led to asylum applications in Denmark reaching a 40-year low in 2025. However, this decline is consistent with wider trends in asylum flows within the EU, making it difficult to attribute the decline solely to domestic policy changes.

In English-speaking countries, the situation is similar. A U.S. green card confers permanent residency with no formal minimum number of years required. But in reality, the vast majority of employment applicants previously held temporary visas.

There is no uniform time limit for refugees entering Canada through the Resettlement Program to obtain permanent residency immediately.

Raising the standard eligibility period for permanent residence to ten years would make the UK more restrictive than most other similar democracies in Europe and North America, and one of the strictest globally. Extending refugee protection to 20 years would make the UK unprecedented in its approach.

These new requirements are closer to those in some of the hardest countries to obtain permanent residency, such as Qatar and Japan, which take 20 and 10 years respectively in most cases.

Research shows that immigration policies that make immigrants’ status temporary make them less likely to integrate into society. In particular, a study of Denmark found that making it harder for refugees to obtain permanent residency reduces their chances of employment.

Those who felt they could not meet the new demands became discouraged and dropped out of the labor force—the opposite of what the government wanted.

The changes proposed in the UK could create a similar dynamic, leaving people in what is known as a “long-term dilemma”. Given these risks, governments should be cautious about increasing immigration itself. SCY

SCY

This article was generated from automated news agency feeds without modifications to the text.