Sweeping Immigration Reforms Without Evidence? Home Office Faces Backlash Over Skilled Worker Visa Overhaul

In a move that has left policymakers, employers, and immigration practitioners stunned, the Home Office has introduced far-reaching changes to the Skilled Worker visa regime without offering the most basic of policy tools: an impact assessment. As a result, the Home Office faces backlash for bypassing proper scrutiny and failing to assess the consequences of its reforms.

The reforms, unveiled on 1 July 2025 through Statement of Changes HC 997, implement significant alterations to the UK’s immigration rules. At their core, they raise the minimum skills threshold to Regulated Qualifications Framework (RQF) level 6. Around 180 jobs, once eligible for visa sponsorship, are now off the table.

Yet the House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has issued a damning report highlighting that these drastic reforms were laid without adequate consultation, nor the impact assessment required for proper Parliamentary scrutiny. The Committee has described the approach as both “inexplicable” and “inexcusable.”

The absence of a full Impact Assessment (IA) has drawn the sharpest criticism. The Committee emphasised that, without it, “proper scrutiny of the instrument is impossible.” This concern is amplified by the Home Office’s history, this is not the first time such an omission has occurred. What is the point of laying a Statement before Parliament if Parliament cannot scrutinise its effects?

When questioned, the Minister for Migration and Citizenship, Seema Malhotra MP, offered that the IA would be published “as soon as possible”, citing complexities in finalising the information. However, the Committee countered that such an explanation suggests the policies were formulated before their implications were fully understood, an irresponsible approach that risks unintended consequences.

Although not presented in the Explanatory Memorandum, the Home Office later admitted that the changes are expected to lead to a 40% reduction in the number of Skilled Worker visas granted, comprising 17,000 fewer main applicants and 22,000 fewer dependants annually. Additionally, 7,000 fewer applications are projected due to the closure of the care visa route.

This information was hidden in an annex to the Immigration White Paper, not within the core documents accompanying HC 997. Why were these figures not presented transparently from the outset? Why has the Home Office repeated its failure to provide basic explanatory materials, despite prior warnings?

Nowhere will the impact be more deeply felt than in the adult social care sector, a sector already on its knees due to chronic workforce shortages. The removal of care roles from the eligibility list, paired with the restriction on bringing dependants for roles below RQF level 6, risks further destabilising an industry already in crisis.

The Home Office asserts that exploitation in lower-skilled roles justifies raising the threshold, yet critics argue this measure merely obscures the real issue without providing protections. Worse, it removes an essential labour pipeline without providing a clear plan for domestic replacement or mitigation.

The reforms also introduce a Temporary Shortage List, replacing the current Immigration Salary List. Occupations on this list will be granted concessions but only temporarily and only with evidence of workforce planning and domestic recruitment strategies.

However, the Committee noted that this new system lacks clarity and foresight. The Home Secretary has commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to review salary requirements, but results will not be available for another six months. In the meantime, both workers and businesses are left in limbo. The Committee warns of a looming “cliff edge” where jobs suddenly removed from the list could render sponsored workers ineligible to extend their stay. The Home Office faces backlash for leaving employers to plan recruitment and investment in an environment where the rules are opaque and constantly shifting.

Among the most ethically troubling aspects of the reforms is the exclusion of dependants for newly sponsored workers in roles below RQF level 6. The Home Office defends this as a cost-saving measure, claiming such dependants contribute less and draw more from public services.

Yet this rationale treads dangerously close to an arbitrary exclusion of family life. Workers are expected to come alone, support essential sectors and then leave, with no path to settlement or family unity. Is this the humane and fair migration system the government promised?

The Committee has given the Home Office until 1 September to publish a full Impact Assessment, warning that failure to do so may lead to calls for oral evidence. It is a stark rebuke and a call to accountability, as the Home Office faces backlash for its opaque and unilateral approach.

These reforms are not mere bureaucratic tweaks. They reshape the UK’s immigration landscape with consequences that will be felt across the labour market and society. Without transparency, evidence, or consultation, these changes represent policy by fiat, not by consensus.

As Parliament reconvenes in September, one must ask: will the Home Office provide answers or continue to govern in the shadows?

With over 20 years of experience and a commitment to excellence, Morgan Smith Immigration is your trusted partner for all your immigration needs. Contact us today to learn more about how we can assist you with UK Visa Applications. For any enquiries or assistance, call us at 0203 959 3335 or email [email protected].