Pramod Thomas is a senior correspondent with Asian Media Group since 2020, bringing 19 years of journalism experience across business, politics, sports, communities, and international relations. His career spans both traditional and digital media platforms, with eight years specifically focused on digital journalism. This blend of experience positions him well to navigate the evolving media landscape and deliver content across various formats. He has worked with national and international media organisations, giving him a broad perspective on global news trends and reporting standards.
GOVERNMENT is set to increase visa fees and immigration health surcharges for migrants in a move aimed at generating additional revenue. However, a minister has expressed concerns that these increases may not effectively reduce record-high levels of immigration, reported The Times.
From October 4, the cost of most visa and British citizenship applications will surge by 15 to 20 per cent. Furthermore, the immigration health surcharge will experience a substantial 66 per cent increase, reaching £1,035 annually by 2024.
An analysis of these changes revealed that the Home Office stands to profit by nearly £3,000 per application.
The additional revenue generated from visa applications is intended to offset the growing expenses incurred due to an influx of migrants arriving in the UK via small boats, as well as the increasing backlog of asylum cases, which is currently at a record high.
While the immigration health surcharge increase was initially designed to fund higher salaries for NHS staff, ministers have stated that both the health surcharge and visa fee hikes are part of their strategy to reduce net migration, which reached a record 606,000 individuals last year.
Immigration minister, Robert Jenrick, asserted that the health surcharge increase, which migrants must pay annually to access the NHS, will contribute to the Home Office's efforts to curb immigration.
According to the New Conservatives group, raising the immigration health surcharge to £2,700 per person per year, quadrupling its current rate, is one of several measures to return net migration to 2019 levels of about 226,000.
However, Universities minister, Robert Halfon has expressed skepticism about the potential impact of these fee increases on immigration levels.
He argued that government visa fees are globally competitive, and there is limited evidence to suggest that fee hikes have significantly affected demand in areas such as work, study, and tourism routes.
Critics have voiced concerns about the financial burden these changes will place on migrants and their families.
The Wellcome Sanger Institute, a genomics research organisation, has criticised the government's decision to increase fees, stating that it is "deeply concerned" about the proposals.
The institute and its staff spent over £300,000 on immigration charges last year and anticipate that the changes will increase overall costs by at least 50 per cent.
“Even for those with a PhD working in a recognised ‘shortage occupation’, or endorsed as ‘global talent’, it already costs a family of four around £10,000 in visa costs to move to the UK for up to three years, and the immigration health surcharge must be paid upfront for all family members. This represents a double tax for these individuals who will already be paying for the NHS through their income tax," Sarion Bowers, Sanger’s head of policy, was quoted as saying by the newspaper.
In addition to visa fee hikes, the cost of naturalisation applications, which grant successful applicants British citizenship, will also rise from £1,250 to £1,500. The Home Office's estimated processing cost per application is £505, resulting in a profit of £995 per application.
The government contends that the increases are necessary to ensure the sustainable funding of the UK's migration and borders system.
Visa application fees generated £1.9 billion in revenue last year, while the total cost of the migration and borders system amounted to £4.8 billion during the same period, with £3 billion allocated to asylum costs, double the previous year's expenditure.
A Home Office spokesperson emphasised that individuals who use the immigration system extensively should contribute to its operational costs, reducing the burden on UK taxpayers.
UK music industry continue to face systemic barriers that hinder progress, visibility, and career growth – despite decades of contribution and cultural influence, a new report has revealed.
The study, South Asian Soundcheck, published last Tuesday (7), surveyed 349 artists and professionals and found that while many are skilled and ambitious, structural obstacles are still holding them back.
Prepared by Lila, a charity focused on empowering south Asian artists and music professionals, the survey showed that nearly three-quarters of respondents earn some income from music, but only 28 per cent rely on it full time.
More than half struggle to access opportunities or funding, and many said they lack industry networks or knowledge about contracts and rights.
Beyond structural issues, almost half said they face stereotypes about the kind of music they should make; two in five encounter family doubts about music as a career, and one in three has experienced racial discrimination.
Although 69 per cent said there was progress in visibility, but 68 per cent still feel invisible within the industry.
Respondents sought urgent action, including mentorship and networking opportunities, stronger south Asian representation in key industry roles and fairer access to funding.
Veteran musician and composer Viram Jasani, who chaired the Asian Music Circuit and led a national enquiry into south Asian music in 1985, told Eastern Eye the findings were “disheartening”.
“I read the report and my heart sank – it feels as though nothing has changed,” he said.
“Back in 1985, we had already identified the same problems and made clear recommendations for better representation, employment and long-term support. Four decades later, we are still talking about the same issues.”
Jasani, a sitar, tabla and tambura expert, said the report focused mainly on modern genres and overlooked traditional south Asian music, which he believes is central to cultural identity.
“Since colonial times, British attitudes have not changed much,” he said. “If they can erase Indian traditional culture and create a community that lives entirely within an English cultural bubble, then they will have succeeded.”
He added that young south Asian artists were often drawn to Western contemporary music, while neglecting their own heritage.
“We are brilliant in Western genres, but that should come after we are grounded in our traditional shashtriya sangeet (classical music),” he said. “Without that foundation, we lose our sense of identity.”
Jasani also warned a lack of unity within the south Asian community continues to weaken its cultural progress.
He said, “People compete with each other while the world watches. For too long, massaging egos has taken priority over producing the best of our culture.”
According to the survey, one in three has experienced direct racial discrimination. One respondent said, “There are virtually no visible and successful south Asian artists in the mainstream – people simply do not know where to place us.”
Another added: “I want south Asian artists to be part of the collective mainstream industry, not just put on south Asian-specific stages or events.”
While the visibility of south Asian artists has improved, with more names appearing on festival line-ups and in the media, the study revealed this progress remains “surface level”.
Lila’s founder, Vikram Gudi, said the findings show progress has not yet been translated into structural inclusion.
“The data exposes what we call the progress paradox. Seventy-three per cent of the people we surveyed earn some money from music, but only 27 per cent earn enough to rely on it as a sustainable career,” he said.
“The Soundcheck gives us the evidence to enact real change and identifies three essential needs – mentorship, representation, and investment.”
Three-quarters of participants said mentorship from experienced professionals would make the biggest difference to their careers. Many stressed the importance of being guided by people who “understand how the industry works and can connect them to decision-makers”.
Nearly the same proportion called for greater south Asian representation across the music industry – not just on stage, but within executive, programming and production roles at festivals, venues, record labels and streaming services.
Dedicated funding also emerged as a priority, with many describing the current grant systems as inaccessible or ill-suited to the diverse and cross-genre work that defines south Asian creativity today.
Two in five respondents reported that family or community resistance remains a challenge, often due to the perceived instability of a music career. The report argued this scepticism is “economically logical”, when there are so few visible south Asian success stories in the mainstream.
Responding to the report, Indy Vidyalankara, member of the UK Music Diversity Taskforce and BPI Equity & Justice Advisory Group, said: “South Asian music is rich, vibrant, and hugely influential. We need south Asian representation at every level of the ecosystem, plus support and investment to match that influence.”
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.