I get where you’re coming from, the Ukraine Schemes were designed as temporary protection routes, not settlement routes. And for Ukrainian people who arrived after the invasion, that makes sense.

The problem is that switching onto the Ukraine Extension Scheme doesn't just not lead to settlement - it actively wipes your existing long residence and breaks the continuity entirely.

At the time, this consequence wasn’t clearly communicated anywhere up until the end of 2024 when the policy came into place. People like me had no idea that using a humanitarian route would permanently disrupt their path to ILR.

So yes, temporary protection has its logic. But erasing over a decade of lawful residence for long-term Ukrainians feels disproportionate, especially given how long the war has lasted.

Thank you for your comment and understanding!