As the UK government considers extending the qualifying period for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) from five to ten years, much of the public discourse has focused on the direct impact this will have on migrants' ability to settle. But there is another, equally pressing concern that deserves attention: the educational future of their children.
The prospect of the ILR timeline being doubled raises immediate and long-term questions about planning, stability, and fairness. One of the most significant and under-discussed consequences lies in access to higher education—specifically, how children are classified for university tuition fee purposes when their parents have not yet achieved settled status.
International Fees for Home Students
Under current regulations, students must hold settled status (ILR) or have lived in the UK for a certain period with lawful status to be eligible for home fee status—a designation that typically reduces tuition fees to around £9,000–£10,000 per year. Without it, children—even those who have lived most of their lives in the UK—are treated as international students. This means facing tuition fees that often exceed £35,000–£40,000 annually.
For students preparing to attend university while their parents are still awaiting settlement, this difference could amount to over £120,000 across a standard four-year course. This is not a theoretical problem; it is a concrete, immediate burden for many families whose children are approaching university age just as they near the end of the current 5-year route.
If the qualifying period for ILR is extended, thousands of children could be forced into international fee status—not because they are new to the UK, but because their parents are stuck in a legal limbo longer than anticipated.
A Question of Fairness and Precedent
This issue is not without precedent. Children of ECAA (European Community Association Agreement) Turkish businessperson visa holders faced similar uncertainties in the past. Ultimately, transitional protections and flexible approaches were adopted in their favour. The Home Office recognised that children who grew up in the UK and were deeply embedded in British society should not be penalised for the technicalities of their parents' immigration status.
A similar approach is needed now. If the government is considering such a significant policy change to ILR, it must also consider the collateral impact on dependents—particularly those entering higher education. These children are not newcomers. They are often the most integrated members of society: born here, raised here, educated here, and aspiring to contribute further through their education and careers.
Call for Transitional Protection
Extending the ILR timeline from 5 to 10 years would be a substantial policy shift with life-altering consequences. It is only just and reasonable that this shift be accompanied by transitional protections, particularly for families already on a route to settlement under existing rules.
At a minimum, children who have resided in the UK for a significant portion of their lives—and whose families are on a lawful path to settlement—should be granted home fee status if they begin university before their parents acquire ILR. Without such protection, the UK risks placing an insurmountable financial barrier in front of children who have done nothing but grow up in the country and aim to thrive here.
The conversation about ILR must move beyond timelines and technicalities. It must also include the real human cost—especially the cost borne by the next generation.