Policy area

Current directionScope: Largely United Kingdom reserved powers, with devolved and local service effectsVersion 1.1Reviewed 26 July 2026
Major policy instruments, costs and delivery design remain open.

Immigration, asylum and citizenship

Run a controlled, lawful and selective immigration system that commands public confidence and considers labour, education, housing, infrastructure, integration and public-service capacity together.

Current direction

Run a controlled, lawful and selective immigration system that commands public confidence and considers labour, education, housing, infrastructure, integration and public-service capacity together.

Honest Politics should support:

  • lower net migration than the exceptional recent peaks;
  • route-by-route assessment rather than one undifferentiated number;
  • skilled and high-value routes justified by national benefit;
  • high standards and enforcement in work and study routes;
  • incentives for employers to train and invest domestically rather than depend indefinitely on lower-cost recruitment;
  • clear and attainable settlement and citizenship expectations;
  • rapid, fair asylum decisions;
  • independent appeal;
  • lawful removal where there is no right to remain;
  • humane treatment and action against exploitation and dangerous criminal routes;
  • international and upstream cooperation.

Important qualification

No fixed net-migration target should be adopted before modelling:

  • visa routes;
  • emigration;
  • fiscal effects;
  • wages;
  • training;
  • universities;
  • family life;
  • housing;
  • health and care staffing;
  • enforcement and legal feasibility.

Main cost and strongest objection

Lower migration or tighter route rules can reduce labour supply, university income, family reunion and capacity in sectors that have not trained enough people domestically. Faster enforcement also requires sustained administrative and legal capacity.

The strongest objection: that supporting lower migration without a number or completed route model may appear to promise control while postponing the choices needed to achieve it.

What could change this direction

The direction should change if route-level evidence shows that a proposed reduction causes greater long-term harm to growth, services, rights or family life than the pressures it relieves.

Before this becomes a developed proposal

The policy must identify a precise problem, realistic options, evidence, rights, distribution, cost, delivery responsibility, territorial scope, evaluation and stopping conditions. A stronger public status cannot be created by wording alone.

Challenge this position

Relevant evidence, delivery experience, factual corrections and serious objections can be submitted through the evidence route.