BY BERNARD RYAN
This is the fourth and final post in a series in which Bernard Ryan of the University of Leicester examines the Government’s earned settlement plan, set out in A Fairer Pathway to Settlement (November 2025). This post considers the implications of that plan, together with the new asylum model called ‘core protection’, for settlement from international protection categories. It argues that the extension of qualifying periods to ten or 20 years for these categories is unprecedented in UK practice, while being substantially more restrictive than policies in comparable countries.
Introduction
This post is concerned with settlement (also known as acquisition of indefinite leave) from international protection categories in the UK. It covers those who arrive in the UK and are recognised as refugees or granted humanitarian protection, and individuals resettled to the UK. It also covers family members of those granted protection, whether admitted as ‘pre-flight’ family members or under other provisions of the Immigration Rules.
Policy on settlement from international protection categories has been radically altered over the past year. On 17 November 2025, Restoring Order and Control, a new approach to asylum for those applying in the UK, termed ‘core protection’, was announced. It involved a reduction in the duration of immigration permission from five years to 30 months, to enable regular reviews of the need for protection. The new model applies to those applying for protection on or after 2 March 2026. On 20 November 2025, in A Fairer Pathway to Settlement, the Government then set out its more general earned settlement plan (see the first blog in this series), which did not exclude its application to international protection categories.
The post will address the combined implications of core protection and the plans set out in A Fairer Pathway to Settlement for settlement from international protection categories. It will consider the 20-year qualifying period for applicants on or after 2 March 2026; the implications of the earned settlement plan for those granted international protection, whether they applied before or after that date; the position of those resettled from abroad; and the position of family members. As in earlier posts in this series, the unprecedented character of these plans will be highlighted, taking past UK policy and the position in comparable countries as reference points.
At the time of writing, the final shape of the earned settlement plan remains unknown. Nevertheless, we hope that the information and sources provided in this series will prove useful to parliamentarians, civil society organisations, researchers and others engaged in the evaluation of future UK policy on settlement.
Core protection: a 20-year qualifying period
What has been announced?
In Restoring Order and Control, it was announced that, for a person covered by core protection, there would be “no path to indefinite status … until [they had] spent 20 years in the country”. A Fairer Pathway to Settlement contained the slightly different formulation that there would be “a starting point of a 20-year qualifying period”. The latter implies that 20 years may become a baseline from which upward and downward adjustments are possible.
It was also announced in Restoring Order and Control that a ‘protection work and study’ route would be created for those granted protection, on payment of a fee. This alternative route would include the possibility to obtain settlement “sooner” than under core protection.
Following the March 2026 changes to the Immigration Rules, core protection will generally cover those who successfully apply for protection in the UK on or after 2 March 2026, including fresh claims. Those who applied or made a fresh claim before 2 March 2026 will broadly be covered by the previous Rules as regards settlement.
Past UK policy
A 20-year qualifying period to settlement would represent a major departure from past UK policy. In the 1980s, refugees generally qualified for indefinite leave after four years’ residence, and those with exceptional leave after seven years. From 1998, under a policy set out in Fairer, Faster and Firmer: A Modern Approach to Immigration and Asylum, refugees were granted settlement immediately, and those with exceptional leave after three years. From 2005, after a change announced in Controlling our Borders, the qualifying period for refugees and those with humanitarian protection (the successor to exceptional leave) has been five years.
A change in policy direction came with the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, which enabled distinctions between two classes of person granted international protection:
- ‘Group 1’ were refugees who had not passed through a safe third country, and who had presented themselves to the authorities without delay.
- ‘Group 2’ were other persons recognised as refugees, and all those granted humanitarian protection status.
Under subsequent Immigration Rules, for successful applications made on or after 28 June 2022, only those in Group 1 retained a five-year qualifying period to settlement. Those in Group 2 were granted ‘temporary’ permission, and became eligible for settlement only after ten years’ lawful residence.
The position was reversed, however, after the Conservative Government put forward the Illegal Migration Bill in 2023, which was designed to prevent many asylum claims even being considered. The Government abandoned the differentiation policy in June 2023, and to switch those already affected back to a five-year route to settlement. When the Labour Government took office in July 2024, the Illegal Migration Act was dropped. That effectively restored the post-2005 approach, allowing applications to be processed and giving successful applicants access to indefinite leave after five years. That approach will be radically altered if and when the settlement aspects of core protection and/ or earned settlement are implemented.
Comparable countries
A 20-year wait for settlement would also be far in excess of qualifying periods elsewhere. In EU law, since 2011, the 2003 Long-Term Residents Directive has applied to beneficiaries of international protection, which entitles them to long-term resident status after five years’ residence. Ireland – which is not covered by the EU Directive – allows individuals granted international protection to apply for citizenship after five years’ post-recognition residence. Canada and New Zealand grant permanent residence to those recognised as in need of protection in-country without a qualifying period. In the United States, individuals granted asylum after entry (‘asylees’) may apply for lawful permanent residence status after one year.
Earned settlement and international protection
The implications of earned settlement for beneficiaries of international protection differ for three groups:
- those who applied before 2 March 2026 in the UK
- those covered by core protection in the UK, and
- those resettled in the UK.
Pre-2 March 2026 cases
There was little discussion of international protection cases in A Fairer Pathway to Settlement, other than to restate the main elements of core protection. It remains unclear whether earned settlement will apply to those granted international protection who applied before 2 March 2026. If it did, many would face significant obstacles to settlement, because of minimum income and English language requirements, a ten-year baseline period, and potential extensions linked to public funds claims or previous immigration breaches.
Core protection cases
Two issues remain unresolved concerning the application of the earned settlement plan to those who apply for international protection on or after 2 March 2026.
First, will the whole earned settlement scheme apply to those on a 20-year route? We saw above that Restoring Order and Control presented the 20-year qualifying period as a minimum, whereas in A Fairer Pathway to Settlement it was presented as a baseline. Each of these formulations leaves open the possibility that earned settlement will apply, without, however, being definitive on the point.
Secondly, will earned settlement apply to an individual who switches to a protection work and/ or study route? In A Fairer Pathway to Settlement, it was said of this category that “refugees would never be in a better position than those covered by the planned baseline qualifying period of 10 years”. The probable answer therefore is that other elements of the earned settlement plan will apply to this category.
Resettled persons
In each of Restoring Order and Control and A Fairer Pathway to Settlement it was indicated that individuals resettled to the UK would become eligible for settlement only after ten years’ residence. The ten-year period was subject to consultation in the latter document.
A ten-year route to settlement would mark a significant departure from previous UK resettlement policy. Most UK resettlement schemes have provided for the grant of indefinite leave upon arrival, including two recent schemes for Afghan nationals. The exception is two schemes for vulnerable individuals from Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East/ North Africa, which had a five-year route to indefinite leave.
It would also deviate from practice elsewhere. In Australia, where refugee status (visa subclass 200) is only granted to those who apply abroad, it confers permanent residence. In both Canada and New Zealand, individuals granted protection through resettlement obtain permanent residence on arrival. In the US, under the Refugee Admissions Program (currently suspended) individuals resettled from abroad apply to adjust their status to lawful permanent resident after one year’s physical presence.
The application of the other elements of the earned settlement plan to resettled persons is again uncertain. While they are unlikely to have committed immigration breaches, it would be problematic if the mandatory requirements and additional qualifying periods due to recourse to public funds applied to them.
Settlement by family members
Until September 2025, individuals granted international protection could sponsor pre-flight partners and children under refugee family reunion provisions. They could then go on to obtain indefinite leave together with their sponsor under Appendix Settlement Protection. On 4 September 2025, however, the possibility for those with international protection to sponsor pre-flight family members was closed. In Restoring Order and Control, it was then announced that – going forward – there would be “no automatic right to family reunion” under core protection.
Partners and children may also be sponsored under the more restrictive provisions of Appendix FM. Provision is made, too, in the Rules for limited classes of adult dependent relatives of sponsors with international protection status. At present, partners become eligible for settlement after five years’ residence, children in line with their parent(s), and adult dependent relatives in line with the sponsor.
Restoring Order and Control included the statement that those who moved from core protection to a work and study route “could” become eligible to sponsor family members and that “the same conditions may apply as for other legal migrants and UK citizens.” A possible outcome therefore would be for Appendix FM, or an equivalent route, to enable sponsorship of family members only by those who moved from a 20-year route to a work or study route. Presumably, family members would also be covered by earned settlement as a whole, probably on an individual basis, subject to the sponsor acquiring settlement.
Whether earned settlement will apply to the family members of individuals who applied for international protection before 2 March 2026 will presumably depend on whether the sponsor is covered (discussed above).
Here again, the earned settlement plan is at odds with past UK practice. Family members of those with international protection status who are actually admitted to the UK will face longer qualifying periods than the current five years, and their eligibility for settlement may be assessed separately to that of their sponsor.
Conclusion
The combination of core protection and the earned settlement plan would lead to unprecedented restrictions upon eligibility for settlement for those granted international protection and their family members. A 20-year qualifying period would far exceed past qualifying periods in the UK and those in comparable countries. If applied to protection work and study routes, earned settlement would add unprecedented delays and complexity in the acquisition of settlement.
There will also be questions about the compatibility of current plans with the Refugee Convention. In the past, official thinking was that there could not be a longer period to settlement for those recognised as refugees than for other foreign nationals. As the then Home Secretary, David Waddington explained in evidence to a select committee in 1984, “The person who is granted refugee status has to be treated under the Convention as well as a worker and, therefore … gets permanent settlement after … four years.” That position was presumably based upon Article 7(1) of the Convention, according to which “a Contracting State shall accord to refugees the same treatment as is accorded to aliens generally.” It is not clear how a 20-year minimum or baseline is compatible with this provision.
In the absence of precedents, and given the uncertainty regarding compatibility with a key international standard, there ought to be a presumption against such a significant set of reforms. The Government’s argument for change is that a generous regime of access to settlement is a ‘pull-factor’ for asylum applications. The desirability and sustainability of a public policy which exposes refugees, beneficiaries of humanitarian protection and families to review of their status for decades must, though, be open to serious doubt.
Bernard Ryan is Professor of Migration Law at the University of Leicester.
Notes
This series of blog posts is based on the briefing paper Earned Settlement: A Policy without Precedent (April 2026), which was part of ILPA’s response to the Government’s earned settlement plan. Previous posts dealt with the general scheme of earned settlement, settlement from work and business categories, and settlement from family categories. A list of contributors was provided in the first post in the series.
Nothing contained within this document is to be taken as legal advice or to constitute legal representations. ILPA recommends that any person who requires tailored legal advice seek it from a qualified legal professional.
ILPA invites members and other leading experts to contribute articles to its monthly blog. The views expressed in all blog posts are the authors’ own and are not necessarily those of ILPA.
- Document Date
- Tuesday August 25, 2026