Immigration policy has frequently moved to the forefront of political debate. At a September press event, Nigel Farage declared his intention to abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), signalling a significant shift in how the UK could manage long-term residency and permanent settlement.

Under the proposal, Reform UK would replace ILR with a five-year renewable visa system. Farage has argued that permanent settlement creates an unsustainable burden on the state, stating that the UK is “not the world’s food bank” and that long-term migration must be reduced to protect public services and restore fairness.

The proposed system would require migrants to repeatedly meet stricter conditions in order to remain in the UK. While detailed policy documents have yet to be published, Reform UK has indicated that requirements could include higher salary thresholds, stronger English language standards, tighter restrictions on family migration and limited access to welfare.

While supporters argue the changes would reduce pressure on infrastructure and public finances, the party has not released specific data showing that ILR holders place a disproportionate burden on the welfare system. Under current rules, most people who qualify for ILR have already lived and worked in the UK for at least five years, paying tax and National Insurance, and meeting income and residency requirements.

The debate has also highlighted widespread confusion about existing immigration statuses. ILR is the UK’s standard form of permanent settlement for non-British citizens who have lived lawfully in the country for a sustained period. It allows individuals to live and work without time limits and is typically the main route to British citizenship, though citizenship is not automatic and applicants must still meet strict eligibility criteria.

ILR is distinct from “Settled Status”, which was created specifically for EU, EEA and Swiss nationals following Brexit. Settled Status operates under different legal frameworks and conditions. While Reform UK’s proposal is focused on ILR, the two terms have at times been used interchangeably in political debate, contributing to uncertainty about which groups would be affected.

Legal experts have also raised questions about how the policy would apply to existing ILR holders. Reform UK has suggested that current settlement rights could be revisited, but retrospectively removing settled status would likely face significant legal and constitutional challenges. Critics argue the changes could increase bureaucracy and insecurity without directly addressing skills shortages or long-term workforce needs.

Devon County Council leader Cllr Julian Brazil questioned the rationale behind scrapping ILR, saying he could “see no reason to change the policy as it stands”.

“People who qualify have shown themselves to be valuable members of our communities,” he said. “They contribute to our economy and should be welcome.”

Brazil added that immigration is often blamed for deeper economic challenges, pointing to an ageing population and falling birth rate. “Without immigration our economy would grind to a halt,” he said, arguing that long-term solutions lie in productivity, education and workforce planning rather than changes to settlement rules.

While Reform UK’s proposal aims to reduce net migration in principle, its practical impact on the economy, public services and long-term social cohesion remains the subject of ongoing national debate.