Migrants on temporary visas in UK shouldn’t be allowed indefinite stay – Kemi Badenoch

The leader of UK Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch, has said that immigrants, including Nigerians, “who come to Britain on temporary work visas should not automatically be able to stay forever.”

Mrs Badenock, in her letter addressed to the UK Home Secretary, dated June 13, pushed back against move by the Labour Party government to review stringent immigration laws, extending the qualifying period for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) to 10 years.

The Tory leader kicked against the move by LP that would exempt about two million immigrants from the 10-year required period to obtain ILR in the UK.

Mrs Badenoch said, “We supported the proposals and had tabled similar before Parliament some months earlier. We are concerned to read reports today that following pressure from Labour MPs anticipating a new direction from an incoming Prime Minister, you are now considering u-turning on previous commitments and exempting approximately two million immigrants who entered the country on work visas from 2021 to today from the changes.”

She argued that the move “is a grave mistake. As Conservatives learned to our cost, five years is too short a time to obtain the indefinite right to remain in the UK. Many of these immigrants are working in low wage, low skilled jobs which could be done by some of the 9 million economically inactive British citizens.”

According to the Tory leader, individuals who are not making a significant economic contribution over a  10-year period should not be allowed to stay indefinitely. Those not working, or working in low paid jobs, should be required to go home at the end of their temporary work visa.

She added, “Receiving ILR currently carries full entitlement to receive benefits. Even if this were restricted for an additional qualification period as some have called for, as things stand the migrants concerned would become eligible for British citizenship a year after receiving ILR and it would be very difficult to restrict benefits for citizens.”

Mrs Badenoch further argued that “there is currently no provision in the Immigration and Asylum Bill or existing powers to vary the welfare entitlements of people with ILR. A u-turn on ILR would unleash huge increases in benefits claims by recent arrivals which hard-pressed taxpayers cannot afford to fund.”

“The government is perfectly entitled to decide at any time the rules on indefinite rights of settlement, including in relation to those here already. No one who has come here on a temporary work visa should have the automatic right to stay forever and changing the rules to extend the qualification period and add conditions for new applications does not constitute a retrospective change,” she said.

Mrs Badenoch’s stance sparked reactions on X with some disagreeing with her position.

An X user, Oluomoofderby said, “I think a five-year period without access to benefits is a fair approach, especially if it leads to ILR without reliance on public funds. It creates a reasonable balance. Immigrants come here, work hard, and pay taxes, so it’s only fair that the system reflects that contribution while also maintaining structure. Let’s meet in the middle. A system that is firm but also fair.”

“Kemi, you built your own life story on migration and starting over abroad. A ten year wait with retroactive rule changes isn’t “control” it’s moving the goalposts on people who did everything right. Thats unbritish like,” @DHKRULLAH said.

Another X user, @SamW4reform said Mrs Badenoch “could have done this during her tenure in government. Another failure of the Conservatives.”