Burnham’s Tighter Control, Longer Settlement, ETA Plans

(UNITED KINGDOM) — Andy Burnham backed the government’s Immigration and Asylum Bill on July 13, 2026, aligning his leadership bid with plans for tighter control of migration, longer settlement timelines and expanded enforcement.

The former Mayor of Greater Manchester and MP for Makerfield emerged as the leading candidate to replace Prime Minister Keir Starmer after Starmer’s official resignation on June 22, 2026. Immigration has become central to the contest, with Burnham saying UK net migration must “fall further.”

Burnham has also moved away from earlier calls to abolish the “No Recourse to Public Funds” policy, which restricts access to most public funds for migrants on certain visa routes. His position now closely matches the agenda of Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood.

The Immigration and Asylum Bill passed by 264 votes to 90. It aims to reduce small boat crossings from France while expanding but capping “safe and legal routes” for asylum seekers.

Labour MPs have divided over the bill, which would also reshape the appeals process. Burnham’s vote placed him behind the government’s approach despite dissent within his party.

His support comes as the government consults on doubling the standard route to settlement for many visa holders from five to ten years. Burnham has broadly supported the change, describing the longer period as necessary for “meaningful integration,” but he has raised concerns about its possible retrospective effect on migrants already living in the United Kingdom.

The proposed extension would affect the route to Indefinite Leave to Remain, or ILR, for many Skilled Worker, Health and Care and other long-term visa applicants. Settlement would therefore take longer for people who currently expect to qualify after five years.

Burnham has signaled that the longer qualifying period would remain part of his immigration platform if he becomes prime minister. His concern about retrospective application leaves open how the policy might apply to people already in the country.

The Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) system would also remain in place. Since February 25, 2026, U.S. citizens and travelers from 85 visa-exempt countries have needed an ETA to enter the United Kingdom.

The digital authorization costs £16 per person and applies to tourists, business visitors and students staying for up to six months. Airlines are enforcing the requirement at departure, denying boarding to passengers without valid authorization.

Burnham has also indicated that he would retain the government’s “Visa Brake,” which limits or pauses certain visa categories to manage migration flows. He has not set out a separate timetable for changing those restrictions.

In a recent BBC Radio Manchester interview, Burnham said the United Kingdom needed to make greater use of immigration detention centres. He linked detention to faster processing and the removal of people whose asylum claims had been refused.

His stated aim is to prevent people without a valid basis for a claim from entering the general population while lengthy appeals continue. The approach would add to the enforcement measures already associated with Mahmood’s immigration programme.

The bill contains a proposed means-tested repayment scheme for some recognized refugees. Under the plan, refugees who later earn above a set income threshold would repay the cost of state-funded accommodation and financial support before qualifying for settled status.

The repayment could reach £10,000 ($13,242). The system would operate similarly to student loan deductions, and settlement would remain unavailable until the balance had been repaid.

The legislation also proposes an Independent Immigration Appeals Authority from 2027. The new body would replace current immigration judges with professionally trained adjudicators, with the stated aim of speeding decisions and reducing backlogs.

Burnham has said he would consider tougher measures to deter people from crossing the English Channel from France in small boats. He has also argued that refugees need safe legal routes to Britain, placing both enforcement and controlled admission within his approach.

His immigration position is developing alongside a harder policy environment in the United States. USCIS issued Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199 on May 22, 2026, describing adjustment of status as a “matter of discretion and administrative grace” rather than a guaranteed benefit.

The memorandum directs USCIS officers to treat adjustment of status under Section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as a discretionary benefit and an “extraordinary” form of relief. Consular processing, which requires an applicant to leave the United States and apply at an embassy or consulate abroad, is presented as the default path.

USCIS spokesperson Zach Kahler said: “From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances.”

The memorandum took effect immediately and applies to pending and future adjustment of status applications. Adjustment of status remains authorized by statute, but applicants now face a requirement to explain why officials should exercise discretion in their favor.

The change could require some UK nationals in the United States to return to the United Kingdom for consular processing rather than seek a Green Card from inside the country. The policy could affect hundreds of thousands of Green Card applicants already living in the United States.

During a briefing on June 11, 2026, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson described new restrictive rules for Employment Authorization Documents as part of an effort to “restore integrity to the system” and target “meritless applications” globally.

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin has overseen a hard-line enforcement agenda. The developments in Washington provide a tougher backdrop for any change in leadership in London, where U.S. citizens now face a stricter entry system and UK nationals in America face added scrutiny during immigration processing.

President Donald Trump linked Starmer’s departure to immigration and energy in a Truth Social statement on June 21, 2026: “Keir Starmer will resign as Prime Minister of The United Kingdom. He failed badly on two very important subjects-IMMIGRATION AND ENERGY (OPEN NORTH SEA OIL!). I wish him well! President DJT”

The statement followed the Peter Mandelson scandal, involving Starmer’s appointed ambassador to the United States and criminal investigations into historical ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Starmer’s government had increasingly diverged from the Trump administration on immigration and energy.

Burnham is expected to seek a reset in the broader partnership with Washington. Any reset would occur as both governments pursue tighter immigration policies, with travel controls, enforcement and settlement rules becoming more prominent on each side of the Atlantic.

His political programme, known as “Manchesterism,” includes public control of energy and water systems alongside support for immigration measures introduced by Mahmood. In an interview on May 16, 2026, Burnham said the United Kingdom needed to put more services back under public control: “energy, housing, water, transport.”

He pointed to Manchester’s Bee Network bus system, saying: “I put them back under public control with the £2 fares, so you take that principle and apply it to energy and apply to the water [industry] – that’s what I think we need to do.”

Burnham has also said he wants the United Kingdom to rejoin the European Union within his lifetime, while rejecting any immediate attempt to repeat the 2016 referendum. He has pledged instead to seek a “closer relationship” with European countries and “consolidate the progress made” in negotiations with the EU.

His European policy does not currently point to a reversal of the government’s recent immigration reforms. Burnham has said net migration needs to fall further, supports retaining NRPF and has backed a longer ILR route, although he has questioned whether new rules should apply to people already settled into life in the United Kingdom.

Current immigration applications, sponsor licence duties and deadlines remain governed by the existing framework unless the Home Office formally changes the rules. A Burnham government would initially alter the political direction rather than the legal requirements already in force.

Any shift would affect sponsor licence compliance, Skilled Worker recruitment, asylum processing, detention, settlement and regional workforce planning. The proposed ten-year route, the repayment scheme and the new appeals authority would require formal implementation before they could change applicants’ legal positions.

The ETA, meanwhile, is already a condition of travel for covered nationalities. Its £16 charge and boarding checks apply regardless of the leadership contest, while the proposed settlement reforms and asylum measures remain tied to the government’s legislative and regulatory process.

Burnham has not entered Downing Street, but his support for the bill and his backing for longer settlement timelines have established the direction of his immigration platform. In London and Washington, migrants and visa applicants are facing systems built around tighter control, increased scrutiny and longer waits for secure status.