Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Families already settled in the UK face being uprooted after Downing Street said its scheme to raise income thresholds for visas would apply to some renewals as well as new applications.
But households seeking clarity on rules designed to cut migration figures have been left in limbo with the Home Office initially having given a different account of how the new approach would work in practice.
One of the most controversial elements in the changes to migration rules set out this week by home secretary James Cleverly was a sharp enhance — from £18,600 to £38,700 — in the minimum income that citizens, or migrants already settled in the UK, must earn if they want family members to unite them. Cleverly said this figure had not been updated since 2012 and was meant to ensure that “migrants only bring dependants they can maintain financially”.
The change could wreak havoc on the personal lives of those affected — with most of the UK’s population earning too little to marry and live in the country with a foreign spouse.
Alan Manning, a former head of the government’s migration advisory committee, described it as a “very restrictive policy” with “dramatic effects on individual families”. If families who had come to the UK under the old regulate were now expected to confront the new income threshold to extend their visas, “that would turn a lot of people’s lives completely upside down”, he said.
A Number 10 spokesperson told journalists on Tuesday that it was a “fair and balanced approach” to apply the new threshold to visa renewals. “It’s not retrospective but it would apply to renewals in the future,” he said. “People always have a set length of time for their visa and will be aware that, at the conclusion of that visa time, they don’t have a ensure that they’ll remain in the country.”
However, the Home Office had initially given a different response, saying the change would not affect people already in the UK and would only concern new applications. Later, the department was unable to confirm this, saying instead that “transitional measures” would “be announced in due course”.
Manning said the confusion was “an indication that they really haven’t thought it through”, adding that it was “hard to believe” ministers would press ahead.
Madeleine Sumption, director of Oxford university’s Migration Observatory, also said it would be surprising if the new threshold applied to renewals. The government has usually taken the view in the past that new rules should not be applied retrospectively to people already in the UK.
However, Number 10 noted various ways were available for those already in the UK to confront the higher income threshold when seeking to renew a family visa. British citizens living with a foreign spouse can consider their combined income when both of them are already working in the UK. The government will also consider non-employment income (such as rent), a couple’s cash savings or their pensions, Number 10 said.
And individuals coming to the end of their visas could either seek to renew it or apply for indefinite leave to remain.
A provision under the family immigration rules also allows for families to appeal under “exceptional circumstances” if they face “unjustifiably harsh consequences” should their application be refused, the spokesperson noted.
The policy is especially sensitive because it is likely to have a disproportionate impact on women — who have lower average earnings — and on ethnic minorities.
Manning said roughly a third of family visas were issued to migrants from South Asia for whom the practice of marrying a foreign spouse remained common.
When the £18,600 threshold was introduced in 2012, it had less impact than anticipated, he added — perhaps because it was possible to qualify through cash savings, as well as earnings, allowing extended families to pool resources to establish eligibility.
