Kemi Badenoch proposes new law mandating immigrants wait ten years before they can claim any benefits or get British passport
Tory leader, Kemi Badenoch has proposed drafting a new law mandating immigrants wait ten years before they can claim any benefits or get British passport.
In a new article for Daily Mail, the UK politician born to Nigerian parents, urged the government to only issue social benefits to immigrants after ten years.
Read excerpts of the article below
The issue of immigration is a clear one for the Conservative Party: it must be tackled in all forms, legal and illegal.
This is a matter of fairness. Britain increasingly appears to favour those who break the rules, arriving illegally and then disregarding the customs and values of the country. Meanwhile, those who work hard and follow the law are left to cover the cost.
Public awareness is high regarding the billions spent on housing asylum seekers in hotels. Less widely known is that low-paid immigrants and refugees can qualify for ‘indefinite leave to remain’ after just five years. This status allows them access to benefits such as social housing and Universal Credit—regardless of whether they’ve contributed through taxes or lived off the state.
Such a policy undermines the contributions of British citizens who have paid into the system and played by the rules. It is fundamentally unfair, and reform is essential.
The Labour Government recently voted against a proposed Deportation Bill that would have taken steps to address these issues. The bill aimed to implement a strict cap on immigration and extend the waiting period to claim benefits or apply for citizenship from five to ten years. It also sought to prevent anyone who had claimed benefits from receiving indefinite leave to remain and would have enabled the government to revoke settled status from those convicted of crimes.
The bill was designed to protect the integrity of the benefits system and ensure a fairer immigration process. Yet it was blocked, much like previous attempts to address illegal immigration—such as the plan to deport offenders to Rwanda, which became tied up in lengthy legal challenges.
Legal obstacles have consistently derailed other initiatives. Reforms to the welfare system proposed by former Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride, which could have saved £5 billion, were similarly stalled in court, giving the current government the justification to abandon them.
This growing trend—where legal action is used to obstruct democratic policymaking—is known as lawfare. Even when unsuccessful, it creates delays and costs that stifle government action and erode public confidence. The country risks becoming paralyzed by its own legal framework.
To address this, a commission has been established under the leadership of Lord Wolfson KC and the shadow solicitor general Helen Grant. Their task is to determine whether essential reforms—like controlling borders, protecting public resources, and restoring fairness—can be enacted while remaining a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
If the commission concludes that meaningful reform is not possible within the ECHR, then a withdrawal may be necessary. This would be done with careful consideration to safeguard basic human rights.The greater danger lies in allowing lawfare to weaken the nation—making it less fair, less safe, and less democratic. There is a clear commitment to uphold British values, protect democracy, and ensure the interests of citizens come first.
