Nigel Farage Unveils Controversial Immigration and Welfare Plans at Reform UK Press Conference

Published: 22 September 2025. The English Chronicle Desk

Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, has announced a series of sweeping proposals targeting migration and welfare policies, promising to end benefits for migrants and scrap the system of indefinite leave to remain if his party wins power. Speaking at a press conference in central London, Farage outlined plans that would require all migrants to renew their visas every five years, meet stricter criteria including higher salary thresholds and English language standards, and face tighter restrictions on bringing family members to the UK. Under the proposals, access to welfare and social housing for non-UK citizens would be eliminated, a move Farage claims could save British taxpayers more than £230 billion over time.

Farage specifically referred to the influx of migrants during Boris Johnson’s premiership, which he has termed the “Boriswave,” describing it as the greatest betrayal of voters’ trust in recent memory. He highlighted that many of these migrants are low-skilled, often unemployed, and reliant on the welfare system, which he argues has placed a heavy financial burden on the public purse. “Far too many that have come don’t work, have never worked and never will work,” Farage said. “The ability to bring dependents of all kinds, and when you realise that most that come are very low skilled, and on very low wages, you start to get a very, very different picture. In fact, you start to get a massive benefits bill.”

The Reform UK leader claimed that his policies would also result in higher wages for British workers, arguing that mass, unskilled migration has, in many cases, depressed wage levels. “Would pay go up under our proposals? Yes, it would go up a bit, and I think that’s a good thing, not a bad thing,” he asserted.

Reform UK’s policy chief Zia Yusuf explained that the plan would abolish indefinite leave to remain entirely, including retrospective rescindment, and close loopholes to ensure that only UK citizens receive welfare or social housing. Yusuf suggested that hundreds of thousands of migrants could lose their settled status in a controlled, staggered manner, giving businesses the opportunity to train British workers to replace them. Those unable to adjust voluntarily would face immigration enforcement under a programme dubbed Operation Restoring Justice.

The proposals have drawn support from some quarters, including William Yarwood of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, who described the measures as long overdue. He argued that Britain’s welfare and universal healthcare systems have attracted foreign nationals seeking taxpayer-funded support, and suggested that complementary reforms to the tax system would be necessary to ensure tangible benefits for UK citizens.

However, the plans have faced immediate scepticism from government officials and opposition parties. Chancellor Rachel Reeves criticised the projected savings, stating that Reform UK’s claims “have no basis in reality” and would be undermined by potential wage increases and other economic consequences. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, speaking at his party conference, hinted at the possibility of working with Labour to prevent a Reform UK government, although he did not commit to a formal coalition arrangement.

Reform UK’s welfare spokesman Lee Anderson framed the proposals as a necessary correction to what he described as decades of mismanagement. Writing in the Daily Express, Anderson condemned previous governments for prioritising migrants over British citizens, citing figures that suggest around 3.8 million new migrants arrived on long-term visas under Boris Johnson, with at least 800,000 expected to gain indefinite leave to remain. According to his analysis, this has contributed significantly to the £266 billion spent annually on welfare, of which £9 billion is estimated to go to foreign nationals.

Farage’s announcement underscores Reform UK’s positioning as a radical alternative in Britain’s political landscape, focusing on immigration control, welfare restriction, and prioritisation of UK citizens. While supporters hail the plan as fiscally responsible and necessary to protect national resources, critics warn of far-reaching social and economic consequences, raising questions about the feasibility and ethical implications of such sweeping reforms.

As the debate unfolds, the proposals are likely to dominate political discourse in the run-up to the next general election, shaping discussions on immigration, social policy, and the future of the UK’s welfare state.