House of Lords Science and Technology Committee calls for a more holistic immigration policy to compete in global race for talent
The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee has raised significant concerns regarding the UK's current immigration and visa policies for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) talent.
Image credit: WikipediaIn a letter addressed to the Home Secretary, the Chancellor, and the Minister for Science, the Committee highlighted the detrimental impact of current immigration policies on the UK's ability to attract and retain highly skilled individuals in the fields of science and technology. The Committee described the current approach as an act of national self-harm, emphasising the need for a more holistic and adaptive approach to compete in the global race for talent.
High up-front visa costs in the UK are identified as a significant deterrent, particularly for early career researchers and postdoctoral scientists. The letter highlights that applicants can face up-front costs exceeding £10,000.
The letter explains: "Analysis of costs by the Royal Society and Fragomen LLP shows that the up-front costs faced by applicants for UK visas are higher than any comparable country, and that these costs have increased by up to 58% just since 2021, while other countries have reduced fees. In particular, the requirement to pay the full Immigration Health Surcharge for the duration of a visa up-front before entry can result in young researchers being faced with costs running into tens of thousands of pounds in immigration fees to relocate. The UK needs science and technology skills to grow its economy and to achieve the Missions set out by the Government. Many individuals who have these skills––researchers, scientists, entrepreneurs, and technology experts––have historically been attracted to the UK by our world-leading universities and scientific heritage. We cannot take this for granted: in an increasingly mobile world, and with growing salary gaps between the UK and competing nations such as the US, we are at risk of falling behind in the global race for talent in these critical areas."
The Committee recommends reviewing visa fees with a view to ensuring the UK is competitive with other countries. In addition, the Government is urged to explore payment alternatives for the Immigration Health Surcharge, such as instalments or deductions through PAYE.
While the Global Talent visa is seen as a positive addition to the immigration system, it is criticised for its high cost and limited eligibility criteria. The Committee notes that many early career researchers are excluded from this visa and struggle to find suitable alternatives in the current system. They recommend clarifying and expanding the eligibility for the Global Talent visa or creating a new route specifically tailored to high-potential researchers in the early stages of their careers.
The Committee acknowledged the Government's pledge to reduce overall immigration numbers but argued that the Global Talent visa accounts for a small percentage of the overall figures (less than 1% of overall figures in 2024). Reducing barriers for highly-qualified recipients of this visa and expanding its eligibility would not significantly impact overall immigration numbers. "It is critical, as the Government seeks to reduce net migration, that the impact this has on key growth-driving sectors, particularly research, science and technology, is recognised and mitigations are put in place," the letter stresses.
In addition, the letter highlights how immigration policies, such as the ban on dependants for postgraduate taught courses, are impacting universities and harming STEM subjects that rely on international student fees to subsidise teaching and research. It calls for a review of the ban and potential exemptions to address these impacts.
The Committee explains: "The freeze on tuition fees has led to a situation where, for many higher education institutions, international student fees cross-subsidise both domestic teaching and research. Reduction in international student numbers has a disproportionate impact on STEM subjects which have the most expensive teaching and research. In particular, this has been exemplified recently by the ban on dependants for postgraduate taught courses, which has had a disproportionate impact on higher education institutions with high proportions of those courses. If the Government's intention is to reduce the overall numbers of international students as part of reducing net migration, it should mitigate any negative impacts on science, research and universities from these policies. The Government should review its dependants ban and consider whether granting exemptions would result in a net benefit for the UK."
Finally, the Committee calls for improved data collection, analysis, and communication to enhance public understanding of immigration and its impacts. They stress the need for transparency and data-driven discussions that move beyond net migration figures. The Government is urged to conduct research into the effects of visa policies on students and researchers, distinguish between temporary and permanent migrants in its statistics, and work closely with the Office for National Statistics and universities to gather better data.