Annual Migration Plan: A New Strategy for UK Immigration?
In This Article
1. Should the UK Introduce an Annual Migration Plan?
2. The Problem with UK Immigration Policy: Fragmentation and Short-Termism
3. Annual Migration Plan: A Strategic Solution for UK Immigration Reform
4. Key Components of an Annual Migration Plan for UK Immigration Strategy
5. Governance and Implementation of a UK-Wide Migration Planning System
6. Public Communication and Parliamentary Engagement
7. Parliamentary Oversight of the UK’s Annual Migration Plan
8. How an Annual Migration Plan Could Improve UK Immigration Policy
9. Will the UK Government Support an Annual Migration Plan?
10. Feasibility of the Annual Migration Plan
11. Is the AMP Politically Feasible in the Current Climate?
12. How Might Stakeholders Respond to an AMP?
13. Are There Risks or Downsides to an Annual Migration Plan?
14. Conclusion: The Case for Long-Term UK Immigration Planning
15. Contact Our Immigration Barristers
16. Frequently Asked Questions
17. Glossary
1. Should the UK Introduce an Annual Migration Plan?
Migration policy in the UK is frequently reactive and fragmented, often driven by headlines rather than strategy. The Institute for Government published an insight paper proposing that the UK introduces an Annual Migration Plan on 10 April 2025. This article will explore the reasons why the Institute for Government recommends the UK government to introduce an Annual Migration Plan and the recommendations suggested.
Migration is one of the most significant and persisting policy issues in the UK. It intersects with the economy, public services, international relations, and national identity. Despite its centrality to political debate, UK migration policy remains disjointed, inconsistent and reactive, often driven by political pressure rather than long-term strategy.
In response, the Institute for Government (IfG) has proposed a new way forward: the introduction of an Annual Migration Plan (AMP). This article provides a breakdown of the IfG’s April 2025 insight paper, summarising the case for reform and how an AMP could transform the way the UK approaches immigration. See also our article UK to Tighten Immigration Rules: Highlights from the 2025 White Paper.
2. The Problem with UK Immigration Policy: Fragmentation and Short-Termism
The UK’s approach to migration is often driven by immediate pressures rather than by long-term planning. Migration policy changes tend to follow one of three triggers:
- The release of net migration statistics by the Office for National Statistics (ONS);
- Pressure from specific economic sectors or civil society groups;
- Responses to global crises such as the Ukraine conflict or the Hong Kong settlement scheme.
This reactive approach creates a cycle of political promises, rising figures, and rapid policy changes. For example, the government has tightened student visa rules shortly after promoting international recruitment, and relaxed care worker visa requirements while simultaneously pledging to reduce overall migration. Many of these decisions end up contradicting previous commitments and undermining policy coherence.
The result is a lack of strategic coherence. Successive governments, across party lines, have promised to “take back control” of migration, but have rarely demonstrated it in practice.
3. Annual Migration Plan: A Strategic Solution for UK Immigration Reform
As stated by the Institute for Government in the Insight Paper, “the UK urgently needs a more coherent and predictable approach to migration policy.” and “An Annual Migration Plan could be the foundation of that change.”
The IfG proposes a structured, transparent, cross-government process that produces an Annual Migration Plan each year. The AMP would set out:
- The government’s overall objectives for migration policy;
- Detailed data analysis of recent trends;
- An evidence-based assessment of the costs and benefits of different migration routes;
- Forecasts of future migration levels; and
- Proposed policy changes across relevant departments.
This proposal is informed by international models already in place in countries such as Canada and Australia. These countries have shown that structured migration planning can support economic growth, ensure public service delivery, and enhance public trust.
4. Key Components of an Annual Migration Plan for UK Immigration Strategy
The insight paper proposes that each AMP should include the following core components:
A. Clear, Strategic Objectives
The government would be required to set out what it wants the migration system to achieve. These objectives could include:
- Supporting the UK economy through targeted work visas;
- Strengthening the higher education sector via student migration;
- Delivering on humanitarian commitments;
- Reducing long-term reliance on migration through domestic workforce development.
These objectives would bring coherence across departments and help balance short-term needs with long-term priorities.
B. A Multi-Year Planning Horizon
Migration policy changes often take time to take effect. Therefore, the AMP should not focus solely on the next 12 months. Instead, it should set out a 3 to 5 year forecast, updated annually, to provide consistency and predictability. For example, Canada’s Immigration Levels Plan operates on a rolling three-year cycle and the Australian government has recently moved from a one-year to four-year cycle.
C. A Detailed Analysis of Migration Routes
Rather than focus only on a headline net migration figure, the AMP would provide a breakdown of migration by route — such as work, study, family, asylum, and humanitarian pathways. Each category would be examined in terms of:
- Numbers arriving;
- Purpose and duration of stay;
- Skill level or educational background;
- Subsequent visa transitions or settlement outcomes.
This level of detail would offer a more accurate view of the role and impact of each route.
D. An Assessment of Costs and Benefits
Migration brings a range of economic and social outcomes. The AMP should include analysis on:
- Fiscal contributions (taxes, visa charges, NHS surcharge);
- Labour market impact;
- Effects on housing, infrastructure and public services;
- Broader benefits (e.g. benefits to sectors such as higher education or social care).
A comprehensive assessment would enable evidence-based policymaking and allow for a more honest public conversation.
E. Forecasts and Scenario Modelling
The AMP should project migration flows by route over the coming years. These forecasts would account for:
- Policy changes (e.g. tightening work visa criteria);
- Economic conditions;
- Labour market trends;
- Global events.
These projections should be presented as ranges to reflect uncertainty and include upper and lower bounds for each route. This would assist with national planning and improve alignment between migration policy and public service delivery.
F. Policy Changes Across Government
The AMP would not be confined to immigration rules. It would also set out linked policy changes in areas such as:
- Workforce training and skills development;
- Education and student recruitment strategies;
- Health and care sector reform;
- Housing and local infrastructure.
This ensures that domestic reforms are part of the long-term solution, reducing reliance on overseas recruitment where possible.
5. Governance and Implementation of a UK-Wide Migration Planning System
The IfG recommends a structured, annual process for producing the AMP:
- Initiated by the Prime Minister and Home Secretary: Each year, the process would begin with a cabinet-level review of migration trends and policy priorities.
- Departmental Submissions: All departments would submit long-term plans addressing their workforce or sectoral needs. They would also be held accountable for reducing reliance on migration over time.
- Independent Advice and Public Engagement: The plan would incorporate evidence from the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), Skills England, local authorities, businesses, and civil society. Broader public engagement could take place every few years.
- Parliamentary Debate and Select Committee Scrutiny: Once published, the AMP would be debated in Parliament. A joint select committee (led by the Home Affairs Committee) would oversee its scrutiny.
- Timing with Net Migration Data: To ensure consistency and public engagement, the plan should be released in tandem with the ONS’s net migration statistics in May or November.
6. Public Communication and Parliamentary Engagement
In addition to formalising the policymaking process within government, the Annual Migration Plan should also improve how migration is discussed publicly and scrutinised democratically.
Currently, much of the public debate around migration is triggered by the twice-yearly release of net migration statistics from the Office for National Statistics. Ministers are often sent to media interviews without having seen the figures in advance, and government responses tend to be reactive. This contributes to a perception that the system is out of control and lacks transparency.
An Annual Migration Plan would provide an opportunity for the government to explain its strategy proactively. By publishing the plan alongside migration statistics, the government could outline its objectives, detail recent performance, and set out planned changes. This would place migration decisions within a broader, more informed context.
7. Parliamentary Oversight of the UK’s Annual Migration Plan
The AMP should be tabled in Parliament and subject to formal debate. This would mirror the existing process used for the national budget and provide elected representatives with a regular opportunity to assess, question, and influence the government’s migration strategy.
In addition, the Institute for Government recommends that the plan be reviewed by a joint select committee, led by the Home Affairs Committee and involving other relevant committees such as Treasury, Education, Business and Trade, and Health and Social Care. This cross-departmental approach would reflect the wide-reaching implications of migration policy and allow for more comprehensive scrutiny.
These steps would support a more structured, transparent, and evidence-led public debate about immigration, replacing reactive commentary with informed discussion based on published government objectives and data.
8. How an Annual Migration Plan Could Improve UK Immigration Policy
Introducing an AMP would represent a significant shift in how the UK designs, delivers and debates migration policy. The benefits include:
A. Greater Strategic Coherence
By aligning objectives across government, the AMP would avoid contradictory policies, such as encouraging international students while simultaneously restricting their visas.
B. Improved Public Trust
A published plan would provide transparency on why migration policy is set the way it is. Rather than reacting to data after the fact, the government could explain its rationale in advance, building public understanding.
C. Better Planning for Services and Infrastructure
Forecasts within the AMP would help national and local authorities prepare for demographic changes, housing needs, education capacity, and NHS staffing.
D. Informed Policy Decisions
Evidence from the MAC and others would ensure that migration decisions are based on robust analysis, not short-term political pressure.
9. Will the UK Government Support an Annual Migration Plan?
Although the government has not yet issued a formal response, pressure is mounting from across the policy landscape. Directors from Onward, the Centre for Policy Studies, British Future, IPPR, and the Institute for Government have jointly signed a letter published in The Times, calling on the government to adopt an Annual Migration Plan.
10. Feasibility of the Annual Migration Plan
While the Annual Migration Plan (AMP) proposed by the Institute for Government offers a promising blueprint for reform, several political and practical challenges may affect its implementation and success.
11. Is the AMP Politically Feasible in the Current Climate?
The UK’s migration debate remains highly polarised. Although the AMP aims to depoliticise migration policy through evidence and long-term planning, it would require strong political will and cross-party consensus—something that has been elusive in recent years. The plan may be seen as technocratic or slow-moving in contrast to the government’s desire for rapid, headline-driven responses.
12. How Might Stakeholders Respond to an AMP?
Business and public service sectors are likely to welcome the predictability and transparency that the AMP offers, especially sectors facing chronic labour shortages such as healthcare, construction, and social care. Local authorities may appreciate the ability to plan infrastructure and services based on clearer migration forecasts. Civil society and migrant advocacy groups may support the transparency but could push for stronger commitments to humanitarian pathways and migrant rights. However, some political groups or media outlets may criticise the plan as too lenient or bureaucratic, especially if it forecasts continued high levels of migration.
13. Are There Risks or Downsides to an Annual Migration Plan?
From an implementation perspective, the AMP would necessitate high levels of cross-departmental coordination, data integration, and institutional accountability. These capacities have historically been uneven across governments. There is a non-trivial risk that the AMP could become a procedural exercise unless underpinned by clear ministerial ownership and rigorous parliamentary oversight.
Furthermore, while the AMP’s forecasting component is essential for planning, migration trends are notoriously difficult to predict due to their sensitivity to global crises, economic shifts, and policy changes both within and beyond the UK. Repeated forecasting errors could undermine public confidence in the plan’s utility and erode the very trust it seeks to build.
In sum, while the AMP presents a compelling solution to the UK’s fragmented migration governance, its success is contingent not only on the quality of its design, but also on execution, political backing, and sustained commitment across electoral cycles.
14. Conclusion: The Case for Long-Term UK Immigration Planning
The introduction of an Annual Migration Plan would allow the UK to shift from a reactive, headline-driven immigration system to one that is structured, transparent and aligned with long-term national priorities.
It would allow for regular review, evidence-based decisions, and a more nuanced public conversation about immigration’s role in society. In doing so, it could help rebuild trust in the migration system and offer greater predictability for employers, education providers, local authorities, and the public.
This reform would enhance coordination across government, support more effective planning, and create space for a more informed and constructive debate about migration. For immigration practitioners, employers, and migrants themselves, an AMP could bring much-needed clarity and predictability to a system that has long lacked both.
15. Contact Our Immigration Barristers
In this article we have explored the discussion within the Institute for Government’s insight paper on the UK introducing an Annual Migration Plan.
If you would like expert legal advice on how potential changes to UK immigration policy could impact you, or need assistance with a visa application or appeal, contact our immigration barristers on 0203 617 9173 or complete our enquiry form below.
