ILPA Raises Concerns About Government’s Early Resolution Policy
Last week, the Immigration Law Practitioners Association (ILPA) released a comprehensive report that critiques the government’s proposed “early resolution” policy, labeling it as “almost unprecedented” both domestically and internationally.
The 12-page report is available for download on the ILPA website.
Authored by Bernard Ryan, Professor of Immigration Law at the University of Leicester, the paper incorporates insights from a variety of immigration lawyers and academics. It highlights that the government’s plan for a 10-year baseline eligibility period for settled and indefinite leave to remain (ILR) is unprecedented in the UK, exceeding the eligibility periods found in most comparable nations.
Under current EU legislation, the Long-term Residence Directive (2003) mandates member states to confer long-term residence status to third-country nationals after five years of lawful residence. Similarly, New Zealand grants permanent residency after just two years for individuals under the Family and Work categories.
Switzerland stands out as the only European country with a similar 10-year residency requirement, while Denmark maintains a slightly shorter eligibility period of eight years for non-EEA nationals.
The vested settlement plan first introduced in the Fairer Pathways to Reconciliation policy paper last November could allow the 10-year threshold to be shortened to three years for individuals in high-income brackets. Conversely, some low-skilled workers might face an extended wait of up to 15 years. ILPA’s report asserts that no precedent exists for such dramatic variability in eligibility periods among comparable nations.
Moreover, refugees are compelled to reside in the UK for 20 years before qualifying for settlement. The paper contrasts this with policies in other countries, noting that, in the EU, provisions for international protection were amended in 2011, allowing beneficiaries to obtain long-term residence after five years. In Ireland, effective December 8, 2025, individuals granted international protection will also achieve long-term status after five years. In Canada, those granted humanitarian protection may obtain permanent residence visas without any eligibility waiting period, and in the United States, asylum recipients can apply for lawful permanent residence after just one year.
The briefing also critiques the proposal requiring a minimum income standard as part of the settlement process. Applicants, particularly “first-time” seekers, would need to demonstrate an annual income of at least £12,570 for several years. This requirement could exclude many individuals from securing permanent residence, even if their households collectively possess sufficient financial resources.
Additionally, the report draws parallels between the current proposal for recognizing voluntary contributions in the settlement process and a similar “active citizenship” initiative proposed by the previous Labor government in 2008. That initiative, which aimed to impose additional residency requirements based on civic participation, was ultimately abandoned following significant concerns voiced by the voluntary sector. The ILPA report questions the rationale for reviving such ideas.
Further concerns involve the government’s plan to apply this new scheme retroactively. Critics argue that this approach contradicts the government’s long-standing policy of safeguarding individuals already residing in the UK against changes in their status for the past 15 years. Historical examples, such as the extension of the partner eligibility period from two to five years in 2012, demonstrate that individuals already within the visa route were permitted to continue under previous criteria. Likewise, similar protections have been afforded in work-related routes, including salary requirements for skilled workers and investment thresholds for visas. The ILPA paper contends that these examples underscore a consistent policy of avoiding retroactive detriment, highlighting the current proposal’s departure from established practices.
