The UKFP prioritisation bill feels unfair to IMGs — especially mid-cycle

I want to start by saying this clearly: I understand that UK graduates should be prioritised.

But what feels deeply unfair is changing allocation priorities halfway through an active application cycle.

As IMGs, we don’t enter this pathway blindly. We follow the rules exactly as they are set.

And now, after people have already committed financially and professionally under one set of expectations, the structure of allocation is being altered mid-cycle.

In my case, I travelled to two different countries just to sit PLAB 1 and PLAB 2. That meant additional flights, hotels, transport, time off work, and logistical stress — on top of the financial cost.

It’s PLAB 1. ( £273 )

It’s PLAB 2. ( £998 )

It’s IELTS/OET. ( £408 : For one IELTS exam, one remark, and one retake )

It’s GMC registration. ( £170 )

It’s visa costs. ( £175 )

It’s flights and accommodation. ( £1707 )

It’s revision resources. ( £387 )

Total: £4,118

It’s months — sometimes years — of preparation under constant stress.

If prioritisation was always going to be the direction, that should have been made clear from the beginning. Announce it early. Apply it to the next cohort. Give people the chance to make informed decisions about whether this pathway is still worth pursuing.

For many of us, this wasn’t just an exam pathway. It was a life decision.

We are asking for:

• Clear, written clarification on what this means for IMGs currently in the pipeline along with published statistics on the number of UKG and IMG applicants as well as the number of training posts/ place holders.

• Transitional protection for applicants who applied under the previous framework.