In the wake of recent strike actions, Rishi Sunak has made a significant decision to increase pay for junior doctors, teachers, and police officers. However, it is the migrant community that will bear the burden of funding this public sector pay settlement.
The funding for the pay increase will come from a substantial rise in visa fees and the immigration health surcharge (IHS). Specifically, the main rate of IHS will surge by 66% from £624 to £1,035 annually. Additionally, work and visit visa fees will see a 15% increase, while other types of visas will rise by at least 20%.
This move is causing concern among the tens of thousands of people on the ‘ten-year route’ to settlement, which grants indefinite leave to remain in the UK, allowing individuals to live, work, study, and seek citizenship. Introduced by Theresa May in 2012, this route already subjects individuals to high fees to maintain their legal status in the country. Over a decade, an adult is required to pay almost £13,000, including the IHS, every two and a half years. With the new fee adjustments, this amount will rise by over £5,000 to at least £18,265 for an adult. Families with multiple members on this route will face even higher costs, with an adult and two children potentially paying nearly £50,000 or more.
It’s essential to recognize the impact of these changes on the individuals taking the ten-year route. These are people who have strong ties to the UK, such as having British children or partners or having lived in the country for an extended period. Removing them would breach their human rights or the rights of their family members.
Unfortunately, the ten-year route is often utilized by women, parents, caregivers, and individuals from Black and south Asian backgrounds. Many of them are long-term residents in the UK, with 60% of those surveyed in an IPPR study having lived in the country for over a decade. While this route offers a lifeline for those who are less financially secure, the exorbitant fees exacerbate their insecurity.
A survey conducted by OpenDemocracy revealed the severe hardships faced by those on the ten-year route. Coupled with the cost-of-living crisis, approximately three in five individuals struggle to afford utility bills, and more than half have difficulty putting food on the table. A significant number have been forced to borrow money to meet the cost of renewing their visa, leading to ongoing debts and potential risks of losing their legal immigration status. The visa fee hike will undoubtedly worsen these challenges.
Interestingly, the government’s announcement falsely pits ‘public sector workers’ against ‘migrants.’ Many individuals on the ten-year route are themselves key workers in the public sector, with almost a quarter working in health and social care, including roles like care workers and nursing assistants. It is unjust for these essential workers to pay twice for their modest pay rise, once through taxation and again through increased visa fees and the IHS.
Moreover, an IPPR poll revealed that nearly half of the respondents found the existing visa fees on the ten-year route to be too high, while only 12% considered them too low. This indicates that the public desires a fair immigration system, and charging such high fees seems disproportionate and unlikely to gain favor with voters.
It’s crucial to understand that this announcement is not an economic necessity but rather a political choice. The government has other progressive tax options available that would not cause inflation. Funding a public sector pay increase through taxation and increased day-to-day spending is a viable alternative.
Those on the ten-year route simply seek to lead their lives, advance in their careers, provide a good life for their children, and contribute to their communities. Instead of making it harder for them, the government should focus on facilitating integration and easing the path to settlement.
Ultimately, this politically motivated decision has the potential to create significant challenges for those who are already facing hardships and financial strain. The government should consider the real impact of these fee increases on migrant families and seek fairer alternatives to support public sector workers without burdening vulnerable communities.
