Retrospective settlement changes ‘manifestly unfair and may be unlawful’, Lords Committee warns
Key Points
- Lords committee says retrospective ILR changes are "manifestly unfair" and may be unlawful
- Majority opposed the plan; a minority supported it
- Singles out Hong Kong BN(O) migrants previously promised a citizenship route
- Warns the UK's reputation would be damaged with skilled migrants
- Says changes should not apply to those already on a qualifying route
Applying tougher settlement rules retrospectively to migrants already living in the United Kingdom would be manifestly unfair and may be unlawful, a House of Lords committee has warned.
In its report published on Tuesday (23 June), the House of Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee addressed the government’s proposal to apply changes to the route to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) to people already in the country and already on a qualifying route to settlement.
The committee was divided on the issue. The majority disagreed with the proposal, considering it manifestly unfair and damaging to the UK’s reputation. A minority supported it, citing the challenges currently facing the country.
The majority concluded that any retrospective change would be unfair towards migrants who had planned their lives around the existing system, making significant long-term decisions on career, housing and family life in the expectation that they would qualify for ILR under the current rules.
The committee said the position was especially egregious in the case of migrants on the Hong Kong British National (Overseas) visa route, given that previous government statements had assured BN(O) holders of a route to British citizenship without any such additional requirements.
The report also warned of wider consequences for the country’s standing. Retrospective action would adversely affect the UK’s reputation, the committee said, and would likely make it a less attractive destination for highly skilled migrants in the future.
The committee recommended that any changes to ILR rules should not apply retrospectively to individuals already on a qualifying route.
While the government might not support the previous administration’s decision to open certain visa routes, it said, that decision had already been made, and many migrants had taken major long-term decisions on the expectation of acquiring ILR after five years.
The conclusion forms part of a wider report in which the committee was unable to reach consensus on several points relating to the government’s settlement and citizenship reforms, reflecting what it described as the deeply held and often principled views surrounding the issue.
