As of next spring, only well-off Britons will be able to marry a foreigner and live with them in the UK. Amid the announcements on skilled migrants and care workers, the home secretary yesterday slipped in something that astonished even experienced immigration watchers: that the minimum income requirement for British citizens to sponsor their spouse is to more than double from £18,600 to £38,700.
For context, if you earn that figure of £38,700, you are in the 73rd percentile on the income distribution. In other words, nearly three-quarters of Britons will be barred from sponsoring a foreign spouse or partner. Their choice will be either to live apart, or together in another country. Splitting up families isn’t a traditional Tory value, but in the battle between the family and cutting immigration numbers even a little, there was only ever going to be one winner.
James Cleverly said in the House of Commons that this was to ensure that people bring "only dependents whom they can support financially". It should be noted that at present, spouses sponsored by UK citizens do not have recourse to public funds and already pay the hefty NHS surcharge in addition to substantial visa fees.
In news that will surprise no one told a thousand times as a child that life isn't fair, these changes will have a life-changing effect on anyone earning less than the new threshold. This will particularly hurt women, part-time workers and those living outside of London and the South East, where incomes are lower.
The previous minimum of £18,600 was high enough to deter the lowest paid, but low enough to fly under the radar. £38,700 will directly impact many more people and therefore gain far more attention. Indeed, professionals who would not qualify for this threshold include newly qualified teachers (£30,000) junior doctors (£32,300) and police constables (£36,775). Of course, salaries tend to rise as people get older. But people also tend to marry when they are younger.
It is also notable that Australia, whose points-based immigration system politicians of all stripes like to reference, has no minimum salary threshold for its citizens wishing to live with their foreign spouse.
Clearly, the government is doing – and wants to be seen to be doing – much more to cut the net migration figure practically any way possible. Yet a brief glance at the numbers illustrates that family migration makes up only a small share of the total.
As the barrister and blogger Colin Yeo points out, while total inward migration to Britain last year totalled 1.2 million, the number of foreign partner visas issued in the same period to British citizens and settled foreign nationals was 65,278. That is 5 per cent, and some of those will still clear the higher threshold.
The political challenge for Rishi Sunak is to get the numbers down fast enough that he can go into the election able to say words to the effect of 'let me finish the job'. More likely, it is the next government that will take the credit for the reduction in net migration when it comes. In the meantime, life for many British citizens and their loved ones will be turned upside down.
In the comment pages, he's the sphinx of Kentish Town, so when will we see the real Keir Starmer, asks Matthew d'Ancona? Anna van Praagh says no one wants a sanitised city but London now feels lawless. While Sophie Heawood adores Madonna, but she can't make her feminist peace with the facial work.
And finally, Josh Barrie tries Deliveroo's 99p Brussels sprouts Christmas sandwich. If you can get over the green sponge look, perhaps worth a go.
