The Guardian view on a migration U-turn: it still leaves unfair changes intact

Britain needs migrant workers, yet ministers would make many wait longer for secure settlement because their essential work commands low wages

Shabana Mahmood has made a partial retreat on her policy to lengthen the wait for some foreign workers who were soon to be eligible for settlement in the UK. But while the home secretary lost the argument in cabinet on a particularly damaging aspect of her proposals, she has won the larger battle that settlement ought to be based not just on residency but also on how much tax has been paid, English language proficiency and the “character” of applicants. Significantly, she has also won the “full support” of the prime minister for this approach.

The home secretary plans to double the standard qualifying period for settlement from five to 10 years for most workers. Importantly, she dropped the proposed 15-year qualifying period for some workers in occupations below graduate level. That is a good thing. Differences in pay, however, should not determine how soon people can put down secure roots. The Home Office’s own figures suggest that a person earning £41,700 makes a similarly positive lifetime fiscal contribution as someone earning £50,271. But the former has to wait five years longer to qualify for settlement than the latter. It is only three years for foreign workers who make enough to be in the top 2% of earners – about £125,000.

It was right that Britain recruited people to perform essential care work after the pandemic to fill gaps in the workforce. But it was wrong for Ms Mahmood to propose using the poor remuneration of that work to delay their permanent place in society. Ms Mahmood’s concession corrects that for some people. But it will cause insecurity for others. Those who came to this country between 2022 and 2025, meet their care worker visa conditions and are paid £25,000 or more will still be able to apply for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) – effectively permanent residency – after five years. The Home Office says that that could cover as many as 146,000 care workers and 136,000 dependants.

However, those who do not meet the requirements will have to get another five-year “health and social care” visa before applying for ILR. The care sector has been beset by allegations that unscrupulous employers have exploited migrant staff by taking advantage of their vulnerable visa status. The government is less clear about how it will be able to tell whether earnings had been deliberately kept low by unprincipled firms.

On asylum, Ms Mahmood makes settlement depend on how people reached Britain. Those admitted through “safe and legal” routes can settle after five years; others face much longer waits – up to 30 years for “illegal entry” by small boat, even after their need for protection has been recognised. But the UN says that refugees cannot apply directly for UK resettlement. Ministers must explain how penalising people for failing to use a route largely unavailable to them amounts to fair play.

Ms Mahmood’s plans are a step towards a Gastarbeiter Britain. The guest-worker logic of the home secretary’s proposals – like that of postwar West Germany – is to admit foreigners to fill labour shortages in lower-earning work while keeping their membership of society conditional. Calling this integration seems a stretch. Settling down, changing jobs at will and planning a family life are how people put down roots. Ms Mahmood’s plans are likely to frustrate the integration that she says she wants.