The UK government has unveiled new immigration policies aimed at tightening control over international students. The recently published immigration white paper proposes reducing the post-study stay period for most graduates from the current two years to 18 months, cutting the allowed stay by six months.
The plan also includes raising visa sponsorship requirements for universities, effectively excluding institutions with higher rates of students who fail to complete their courses. Furthermore, the white paper suggests introducing a 6% tax on university income derived from international student fees.
Universities have expressed strong concerns that these measures will worsen their financial challenges. However, the government appears to prioritize immigration control over university funding concerns.
Universities remain one of the UK’s most valuable global assets, generating significant export revenue and international influence. Following last year’s general election, the then Secretary of State for Science, Peter Kyle, promised an end to what he called the “university wars” initiated by the previous Conservative government, including a more welcoming approach to international students.
The tone and policy shifts reflected in the white paper mirror trends seen in other popular study destinations, partly driven by the rise of nationalist parties opposed to immigration. However, the UK faces a unique dynamic due to the government’s broader agenda to reform higher education.
Politics and Immigration
Just two weeks before the white paper’s release, the Reform Party gained control of ten local governments in England, securing 677 seats. The party’s growing support poses an increasing challenge to the Labour government.
Reform’s platform emphasizes the impact of immigration on communities and wages. International students, counted within immigration statistics and increasingly remaining in the UK workforce, have become a focal point. Like other nationalist and anti-immigration parties globally, Reform draws strong backing from voters without university degrees.
Similar policies to limit international student admissions and reduce university funding have also been implemented by nationalist-led governments in the United States and the Netherlands. Yet, such measures are not exclusive to nationalist parties: earlier this year, liberal and labor governments in Canada and Australia also pledged to limit international student enrollments before their respective elections.
This appears to be a strategic stance by the UK Labour government, aiming to reassure voters more concerned about immigration than university finances.
Higher Education Policy
Beyond immigration control, the government is concerned about employer over-reliance on migrant labor and universities’ dependence on international students. It urges both to focus more on developing the UK’s domestic workforce. This requires employers to invest in skills training and universities to offer courses aligned with future key competencies.
The white paper notes, “At a time when skills are more critical to the economy and employment prospects than ever before, we have long lacked coordination and investment to deliver the skills and capabilities our economy requires.”
Coordinating higher education investment in England is challenging because most government funding is channeled through student loans. This system encourages universities to meet young people’s demands, which may not align with economic and public service priorities.
Following years of sluggish economic and productivity growth alongside rising minimum wages, one in ten graduates earns only slightly above the minimum wage.
In response, the previous government promoted apprenticeships over university degrees for young people and allowed the real value of living cost loans and tuition fees to decline. Universities have increasingly relied on international students, particularly one-year taught postgraduate students from Nigeria and India, who often bring family members and remain in the UK workforce. This reliance creates short-term revenue but also increases immigration figures.
Changes in family visa rules, coupled with global economic downturns and geopolitical tensions, have led many universities to forecast a 21% drop in new student admissions this year, with 44% expecting financial deficits.
Unlike its predecessor, the current UK government has acknowledged that student tuition fees should rise with inflation and has allowed increases for the first time since 2017. Nevertheless, it expects universities to make changes: reducing dependence on international students, improving efficiency, and focusing on courses aligned with government priorities.
In a system almost entirely funded by tuition fees, the government has limited means to enforce these changes. The Office for Students, responsible for regulating higher education, has been directed to prioritize managing quality and financial risks rather than policy initiatives.
Strategic funding has been reduced, but the white paper highlights three measures with potential long-term impact.
First, reforms to the apprenticeship levy aim to increase flexibility to focus investments on workforce priorities. Second, stricter sponsorship rules will encourage international student recruitment for courses that deliver the highest skills and knowledge levels. Third, the proposed tax on international student income would enable government investment in priority courses, reducing reliance on student choice.
The first measure is already underway. A new body called Skills England has been established to determine investment priorities.
While the proposed tax on international student income could be challenging to implement—Australia’s experience suggests difficulties—there is clear government will for higher education reform.
Related Topics
