Clare De Silva: The Conservative Party must not forget its principles, including when it comes to immigration

Clare De Silva is social enterprise consultant and former Enfield Councillor.

What is going on with our immigration policy? Will changes to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) be exclusively for people applying for the first time? Will they be applied retrospectively to people already here? It appears that nobody quite knows.

When it was widely circulated that Kemi Badenoch had changed her mind on the immigration bill put forward in May, Reform were quick to gain political points over the apparent U-turn. Then, quick as a flash Chris Philp came out swinging to say that the policy had not in fact changed at all. The problem is we can’t out Reform Reform. It’s tempting when the polls look like they are stealing a march, but if we try – as we are discovering – it’s a mess. A complete mess.

The root of all this lies in a much deeper issue. The need to lay out a comprehensive Conservative strategy for the country, isn’t just something we need to do for ourselves and for the sake of the party, we need to do it for the sake of the country. We urgently need to outline a vision, the big picture, a direction of travel for the UK under which individual policies sit as and when they are formed. Our philosophy. Our uniqueness. To demonstrate how life could be different and, crucially, better than it is now for people in a future Conservative-led Britain. Not a Reform Britain.

We don’t need to do their job for them. They can mess that up all by themselves. If people really want to vote for Reform policies on immigration and so on, they will vote Reform. To have any chance of survival as a party at all we need to articulate our distinctiveness. After all we cannot seriously be suggesting that we have Conservative MPs and candidates stand on a platform of the mass deportation of innocent people at the next election.

The confusion around Conservative policy regarding indefinite leave to remain (ILR) demonstrates a lack of central direction which has led to what looks like a policy free-for-all. It could also turn out to be a pivotal moment, defining what it means to be Conservative. The shock at Katie Lam’s comments (including amongst our MPs) made in her interview in The Sunday Times where she spoke about deporting people who are here perfectly legally and the chaos of a possible u-turn shows that we either haven’t thought the policy through or have made a complete hash at communicating it. Either way it doesn’t sound very Conservative.

I always thought that part of Conservativism was about respecting the rules, and those who play by them. Not ripping up the rulebook mid-game. I also thought it was about recognising the role of families in our society and not pulling them apart for political points. There was definitely something in Conservatism about enabling people to make a better life for themselves too. Somewhere in there. It all seems to be slipping away.

At some point over the last year there has been a small, but very significant shift in Conservative policy around indefinite leave to remain. The problem is that nobody seems to have noticed it until it is almost too late. Kemi Badenoch’s big pitch to the Party was about taking her time on policy announcements so that they were solid, workable and credible. Instead, it seems as if policy is being made up on the hoof, under the radar and worst of all, as a reaction to what Reform and individual Tory MPs are doing.

Initial announcements at the beginning of the year pointed to a sensible tightening up of the criteria for new applicants so that only those earning a reasonable wage and actively contributing to the economy will be able to gain ILR. Since then Conservative policy out of nowhere seemingly hardened to include stripping IRL from many people who already have it, particularly if they subsequently lose their job, don’t work or claim benefits. This is a seismic difference and of course mimics almost perfectly Reform’s grand announcement a few weeks before that they would scrap indefinite leave to remain completely for both new applicants and those already here legally with IRL. What the plan is now is unclear.

In practice, both these pitched Reform and Conservative approaches would have pretty much the same impact on pretty much the same people. Anyone with ILR who has claimed benefits or earns below a certain threshold will be out. Deported. Do not pass go and definitely do not collect £200. (In these versions this could well include stay at home parents, even where a spouse is working. Part time workers or those earning under the desired threshold will be affected too, a measure which could disproportionately affect people outside of London or the South East where wages are typically lower, scooping thousands of innocent, hard-working people into the deportation bracket.)

Indefinite Leave to Remain as it currently stands has been a vehicle for many, many people to put down proper roots here. They may own property or have kids who are British citizens. They could be on a low wage, but still contributing to our country. They may not have had the means to pay for the privilege of applying for full British citizenship. Under the Conservative’s proposals their rights will change. For people coming into the system this does actually make sense, but applying the criteria retrospectively is quite different.

Deporting people here legally who have ILR would be profoundly unfair and would tear families apart. There is a case for restricting access to benefits for anyone who isn’t a British citizen creating an emphasis on work and contributing to society if the main problem with the current system is an economic one, but actually deporting people who have done nothing wrong and who have made a life here? Unthinkable. If we do that are we even Conservative?