The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has concluded its rapid review of the UK graduate route, finding no evidence of widespread abuse.

In a key moment for the sector, the report recommends that the government maintains the two-year visa unaltered.?It says the?graduate route is not undermining the integrity and quality of the UK higher education system but, instead, it is helping universities expand the range of courses offered while making up for financial losses on domestic students and research.

The highly anticipated 70-page report details the findings of the committee, chaired by Brian Bell, a professor at King¡¯s College London, which was asked to investigate by home secretary James Cleverly.

Here we summarise everything you need to know about the review.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

What does the MAC review recommend?

The key recommendation is that the two year graduate visa is maintained intact after the review concluded it had broadly met its aims. Whether this is enough for a government under pressure on immigration to shelve any plans it may have had on further restricting post-study work rights remains to be seen.?

The report does contain some other recommendations of note, including:?

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

• A?mandatory registration system for international recruitment agents and subagents should be created by the government.
• Universities should be required to publish data on their spend on recruitment agents and the number of international students recruited through such means annually
• The government should only open new migration routes or make significant policy changes when it has a clear plan for how it will collect and monitor data to assess the effectiveness of the route against its objectives
• The?ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ Office should introduce a requirement for universities to provide it with confirmation of the course outcome (for example, class of degree) on the student route, in addition to confirmation that a course has been successfully completed.

What?does the MAC say about how the graduate visa works?

The report is the first to take a large-scale look at the workings of the visa, aided by some new ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ Office data. As such there is lots in?it that demonstrates what is and is not working?well. Particular findings of note include:

• The use of the graduate route is concentrated among four nationalities.?India, Nigeria, China and Pakistan account for 70 per cent of all graduate visas, with Indian nationals making up over 40 per cent
• A majority of those on the graduate route completed postgraduate taught courses and this share has increased since the route¡¯s introduction
• The age profile of those on the visa is changing. Since 2021, the proportion of main applicants aged over 25 has increased by 15 percentage points to 54 per cent in 2023. However, this was before the introduction of the dependant rule change
• Most of the growth since the graduate route¡¯s introduction is from non-Russell Group universities¡¯ postgraduate courses, which account for 66 per cent of all graduate visas. 91 per cent of graduate visa holders in 2023 had completed a postgraduate taught course
• The route may not be attracting those from the best ranked globally institutions, but the report says this is an imperfect proxy for the quality of international students
• About 40 per cent of applicants were based in London, which suggests that students may be moving to the capital for work after graduating from universities in other parts of the UK
• There was significant growth in students coming to study in the capital between 2019 and 2023 ¨C but there was faster growth in Wales and the East of England
• Graduate visa holders are likely to be net fiscally positive because of their tax contributions, their low healthcare costs, the requirement to pay the Immigration Health Surcharge, and the no recourse to public funds restriction.

Is the graduate visa being used for immigration instead of education?

This was the key claim of critics of the graduate route, calling it a ¡°Deliveroo¡±?visa because, they said, most recipients go into low paid work and use?¡°low quality¡± courses as a back door to enter the country. The MAC¡¯s findings on this include:?

• It appears graduate visa holders are initially over-represented in lower-paid work but their outcomes, including wages, improve over time. Among the first cohort of graduate visa holders, roughly half moved on to skilled worker visas, primarily into skilled roles.
• Claims made in a ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ Office letter ¨C that only 23 per cent of students switching from the graduate route to the skilled worker route in 2023 went into graduate level jobs ¨C were incorrect
• A high proportion of students (20 per cent) who switch onto the skilled worker route join the care sector
• The median monthly income of those identified as being in work is ?1,750 (equivalent to ?21,000 annually)
• On the wider question of whether the route is being abused, the MAC says evidence indicated that levels of abuse on the graduate route are very low, in part because there are?a limited number of conditions attached to the route

What else can we learn from the MAC review?

Despite initially being quite narrowly focused on the graduate route, and specifically any?ways in which it is being abused. The MAC also has quite a lot to say on international recruitment in general:

• Previously announced policy changes, such as the ban on dependants, will probably trigger a significant reduction in the future use of the graduate route on their own
• Some?recruitment agents by universities in certain markets may be providing misleading information to prospective international students
• Further restrictions of the graduate route would?probably result in the government missing its target of hosting 600,000 international students. It would also cause universities across the UK to experience further substantial financial difficulty leading to job losses, course closures, a reduction in research, and possibly some institutions to fail
• Restrictions on the graduate route have made the UK¡¯s offer less attractive to international students compared with rivals such as Australia, Canada and Germany.

What happens now the MAC report has been published?

The government has said that it is ¡°considering the review¡¯s findings very closely¡± and ¡°will respond fully in due course¡±. Despite the report¡¯s conclusions, ministers are under pressure from Conservative backbenchers to bring down migration and place additional restrictions on the graduate visa ¨C pressure which may only be heightened by the release of fresh migration data later this month. However, the sector will now be able to argue that its arguments have been vindicated by a robust review.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com