Sponsor records · Manual snapshot · Checked 21 September 2026
Restore Britain immigration policy: sponsor records (2026)
Restore Britain proposes that non-citizens hold only strict, time-limited status conditional on work, tax contribution and good character, with the benefits of indefinite leave to remain ended. The party publishes no sponsor-duty position. The immediate risk for a sponsor is treating a proposal as a reason to alter a settled worker’s record.
Last updated .
Announcement register
What is proposed, and what must not change today?
On smaller screens, scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Proposal | Source and status | Record question if enacted |
|---|---|---|
| Benefits of indefinite leave to remain ended | Official policy page, dated 13 Feb 2026; checked 21 Sep 2026. States that the remaining element would be indefinite residency “easily revocable on our terms at any time”. Party proposal, with no mechanism or commencement. | Do not mark an existing settled-status record as expiring and do not create a renewal date from this proposal. A worker holding indefinite leave holds it until the law says otherwise. If a revocable model were enacted, the question would be what evidence establishes continuing status — which the proposal does not answer. |
| Status conditional on work, tax and good character | Same policy page, 13 Feb 2026. No mechanism, evidence standard or employer role is specified. | A condition tied to employment and tax would imply some ongoing employer evidence, but the proposal names none, so there is nothing to build. Do not begin collecting tax or conduct information about workers on this basis; that would create a data-protection exposure with no legal basis behind it. |
| Deportation programme | Same page, alongside a reported 133-page policy document and a stated net-negative immigration target; recorded from a secondary reference and checked 21 Sep 2026. Enforcement policy, not an employer instruction. | No sponsor evidence field or reporting deadline follows from this. Continue right-to-work checks exactly as current official guidance requires. |
| No stated position on work visas or sponsor duties | The party’s published immigration page sets out no work-visa route, sponsorship mechanism or employer enforcement duty. Recorded as an absence, checked 21 Sep 2026. | Worth logging: there is no party source to review against Appendix D, so any statement about what this party would require of sponsors is inference rather than policy. |
Last verified 21 September 2026. Sourcing limitation: the party’s site was not consistently reachable on that date — the apex domain returned a certificate mismatch and the short /immigration path returned 404 — so the policy page is cited at the URL that did resolve, and the longer policy document’s existence is recorded from a secondary reference rather than read in full. Nothing here assesses whether a proposal would be lawful or would apply to any person. Record questions are Soteriaa’s editorial inferences, not duties.
The live risk on this page
Do not change a settled worker’s record because of a proposal
Of everything in this register, the proposal to end indefinite leave is the one most likely to be mistaken for a deadline.
The government has its own settlement proposal and current guidance, and Reform UK proposes a different renewable-permission model. Shared vocabulary does not make these proposals identical, enacted or interchangeable, and none of them is a reason to change a record today. The tracker keeps their sources and statuses apart.
- Leave existing indefinite leave records as they are, with no review or expiry date derived from a proposal.
- Label any planning scenario as hypothetical and date its assumptions.
- Do not collect additional personal, financial or conduct information about a worker on the strength of a party proposal.
- Refer questions about an individual’s immigration position to an appropriately qualified adviser.
How strong is the source for each row?
The three parties added on 21 September 2026 publish less sponsor-specific material than the government, the Conservatives or Reform UK, and two of their own websites could not be read in full on that date. Each row above therefore states what kind of source it rests on — a party policy document, an election manifesto, an adopted motion, a remark reported by a third party, or a recorded absence of any published position. A weaker source is not a weaker duty; it is not a duty at all. Where a party’s own text was unreachable, a dated secondary source is cited and identified as one, and the gap is named rather than filled by inference.
How to use this dated tracker
This is a selected, manually checked register, not a live feed or a complete statement of immigration law. Party sources establish what a party announced; they do not establish a legal obligation. Suggested record questions are Soteriaa’s editorial interpretation, not new duties. Recheck official sources before acting and whenever guidance, bill stages or commencement dates change. Soteriaa sells document and tracking software and does not endorse a party. Soteriaa provides document and workflow tools, not legal assistance or compliance advice. It helps organise records, evidence and deadlines; it does not determine compliance, certify records or submit official reports on your behalf. You review the information and remain responsible for required checks and submissions.