Nigel Farage’s recent initiative to limit migrants’ ability to seek permanent residency has hit a snag due to an error related to savings calculations. The Reform UK leader proposed eliminating indefinite leave to remain (ILR) and requiring migrants to renew their visas every five years if his party gains power. The new system would entail stricter criteria, including higher salary thresholds, improved English proficiency, a residency requirement of seven years instead of five, and tighter regulations on bringing family members to the UK. Additionally, the proposed visa would exclude access to benefits.

Farage and the head of policy at Reform, Zia Yusuf, claimed that the changes would result in savings exceeding £230 billion for British taxpayers. However, these figures were drawn from a report by the Centre of Policy Studies from February, which the think-tank has since disavowed.

Critics, including a source from the Labour party, have criticized Reform UK’s plan as ill-conceived and lacking credibility. Keir Starmer’s political spokeswoman accused the party of sowing division rather than addressing critical national issues. Chancellor Rachel Reeves cast doubt on Reform UK’s projected savings, suggesting they are already unraveling.

Farage defended his proposal, emphasizing that welfare benefits would be restricted to UK citizens only, aiming to rectify what he termed as the failures of Boris Johnson’s policies. In response, a government spokesperson highlighted existing measures to prevent illegal migrants from accessing benefits and ongoing efforts to reform the welfare system.

A spokesman for Reform UK rebutted criticisms, asserting that the estimated savings could be even higher due to factors not accounted for in current analyses. The party highlighted potential differences in ILR uptake rates among various migrant cohorts, suggesting that the actual cost savings might surpass initial projections.