‘Settlement is not a prize handed out by the state’

This is an opinion piece by Abdul Malik, Green councillor for Ashley and was orginally published on Bristol 24/7 in February 2026. 

The government’s so-called “earned settlement” proposals are deeply troubling and should be withdrawn.

They are being presented as reasonable and pragmatic, but in reality they entrench the hostile environment and turn insecurity into a permanent condition for millions of people who live and work in this country.

They are not about fairness or contribution. They are about control, division, and the steady erosion of rights.

At the centre of these proposals is the idea that belonging must be repeatedly earned. That the right to stay, to feel safe, and to build a life can be conditional, delayed, or withdrawn altogether.

Abdul Malik received a hate-filled letter in October, with abusive language and references to far-right groups – photo: Abdul Malik

I reject that premise. Settlement is not a prize handed out by the state. It is a right rooted in dignity, stability, and equality.

By creating hierarchies based on job type, income, or so-called skill level, the proposals deliberately divide workers against one another.

Care workers are treated as less valuable, despite holding up our health and social care systems. Migrants are set against migrants, and migrants against people born in the UK. This is not accidental.

A divided workforce is easier to exploit. When people are kept insecure, wages fall, conditions worsen, and unscrupulous employers benefit. In the end, it is working people as a whole who lose.

Green politics has always rejected this divide-and-rule approach. There are no deserving and undeserving migrants. There are simply people who work, care, contribute, and belong. Security for some but not others weakens rights for everyone.

These proposals also cannot be separated from Britain’s history or its responsibilities. Many of the communities most affected come from countries shaped by colonial extraction and long-term economic harm. After the Second World War, people from former colonies were encouraged to come to Britain to rebuild the country. They did exactly that, and they continue to do so today. They staff our hospitals and care homes, drive our buses and taxis, clean our workplaces, and keep essential services running. During the pandemic they were rightly called key workers. Now they are being told that their work is not valued enough for them to belong permanently. That is not just unfair. It is dishonest.

We also have to be honest about the present. Britain is one of the world’s largest historic polluters. Climate breakdown is already displacing people and will continue to do so. Yet instead of acknowledging this responsibility, the government responds with punishment and exclusion. Turning our backs on people forced to move by crisis is not a strength. It is denial.

The proposals go even further by deepening the criminalisation of refugees and people seeking asylum, despite the fact that there are almost no safe routes to protection in this country. The language of illegality is used to create fear and justify cruelty, but people do not risk their lives for convenience. They move because staying is no longer possible. Seeking asylum is not a crime. It is a human right.

Access to healthcare, housing, and basic support should never depend on immigration status. Anyone can fall ill, lose work, or face hardship. A society that withholds help at the point of need is not a strong one. The policy of no recourse to public funds does not promote independence or integration. It creates vulnerability, exploitation, and harm. Security allows people to settle, participate, and contribute fully. Fear does the opposite.

There is a better way. An immigration system grounded in Green values would treat settlement as a right, not a reward. It would end the hostile environment, remove no recourse to public funds, expand safe and legal routes for refugees including those displaced by climate change, and enforce workers’ rights so exploitation is tackled at its source rather than hidden behind borders and bureaucracy. This is not radical. It is practical, humane, and long overdue.

We are being asked to accept a future built on permanent insecurity and division. We should refuse. A fair society is one that recognises people belong where they build their lives, care for others, and contribute to their communities.

Settlement is a right, and these proposals undermine that principle at their core.