APPGs Publish New Report on the Effects of Recent Changes to Immigration, Asylum and Refugee Policy on Poverty and Inequality. 

The APPG on Migration and the APPG on Poverty and Inequality are pleased to publish our  new joint report, The Effects of Recent Changes to Immigration, Asylum and Refugee Policy on Poverty and Inequality. 

This joint follow-up inquiry builds on our 2024 report examining the effects of immigration policy on poverty in the UK. Since that report, the policy landscape has changed substantially, with a new Government pursuing some of the most significant changes to the immigration and asylum system in recent decades as well as setting out commitments on child poverty, homelessness and social cohesion. This inquiry was launched to specifically examine the impact these new immigration policies are having, and are likely to have, on poverty and inequality, and to assess whether our previous recommendations remain fit for purpose. 

Our 2024 inquiry found that migration experiences and immigration policies have a significant effect on risks and rates of poverty for some groups, and the evidence received by this follow-up inquiry indicates that the proposed reforms would, in several important respects, intensify these effects rather than address them. The evidence also found that the proposals would undermine the Government’s ambitions to reduce child poverty, end homelessness and strengthen social cohesion. 

We received 41 submissions of written evidence from charities, legal practitioners, researchers, local authorities and service providers, and heard powerful oral testimony, including from people with direct lived experience of the changes under consideration. We are grateful to all those who took the time to share their expertise and experiences.

The evidence considered by this inquiry suggests that the Government’s proposed reforms would increase the risk of poverty for some, including by:

• Extending the standard route to settlement from five to ten years, and tying continued progress towards settlement to earnings, English language proficiency and other contribution requirements that not all migrants are equally able to meet;
• Extending No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) conditions across longer settlement pathways, and in some cases beyond the point of settlement itself. The evidence suggests that linking settlement prospects to the use of public funds risks deterring families from accessing support to which they are legally entitled, with some already declining assistance for fear of being penalised through longer routes to settlement;
• Reducing refugee protection from five years to thirty months under a new “Core Protection” model, increasing uncertainty and replicating barriers to employment and housing already experienced by other groups on temporary status;
• Replacing the statutory duty to accommodate destitute asylum seekers with a discretionary power, and replacing existing Section 4 support with a more restrictive scheme, increasing the risk of homelessness and destitution. Particular concern was raised about proposals to withdraw accommodation and financial support from families with dependant children whose asylum claims have been refused, potentially leaving children destitute as part of immigration enforcement and raising significant concerns about child welfare;
• Raising the English language requirement for settlement without a corresponding increase in funded provision, risking the transformation of a measure designed  to increase integration into a barrier to it; and
• Continuing to impose high and rising direct costs on families and individuals seeking to remain in the UK legally, including immigration and nationality fees that have increased considerably since our last report. These rising costs disproportionately affect larger families and lower-income households, widening existing inequalities between different groups of migrants.

The inquiry found little evidence that the key drivers of poverty among migrant households identified in the APPGs’ 2024 report have been addressed. The Government should therefore consider the following measures to ensure that the proposed reforms do not deepen poverty and inequality.

• Removing the retrospective application of proposed earned settlement reforms to individuals already on an existing route to settlement;
• Reconsidering the proposed extension of the standard route to settlement, in line with our 2024 recommendation that no route to settlement should exceed five years;
• Publishing the full evidence base underpinning the Government’s projected £10 billion in fiscal savings, so that this estimate can be properly scrutinised before further reforms are pursued;
• Reducing immigration and nationality fees, including the Immigration Health Surcharge, for lower-income households already resident in the UK, with fees reduced to cost price for children and young people on a path to settlement and citizenship;
• Ensuring that NRPF conditions are strictly time-limited, and that nobody on a path to settlement is subject to these conditions for more than five years, or at any point after settlement has been granted;
• Removing child-focused benefits, including Child Benefit and the Healthy Start scheme, from the definition of ‘public funds’ for the purposes of NRPF restrictions,
• Ensuring that the refugee move-on period reflects the time genuinely available in practice, including by ensuring all relevant documentation is issued at the same time as an immigration decision;
• Reaffirming, and where necessary reforming policy, so that all services for children and young people, including early years provision and post-16 Further Education, should be available regardless of immigration status; 
• Simplifying and widening free access to English language provision, recognising that raising requirements without investing in the means to meet them risks harming rather than supporting integration ;and
• Publishing full impact assessments for the proposed reforms, including Child Rights Impact Assessments and Equality Impact Assessments where appropriate, before the measures are implemented.

Several of the measures examined in this report remain subject to consultation or have yet to be implemented. The evidence received through this inquiry demonstrates the significant concern these proposals have generated among local authorities, civil society organisations, academics and people with lived experience. We therefore urge the Government to carefully consider the findings of this inquiry, assess the wider social and economic impacts of the proposed Home Office reforms, and amend the proposals where necessary to ensure they support, rather than undermine, the Government’s broader policy objectives.

Read the full report here