Jim Ratcliffe apologises for claiming Britain ‘colonised’ by migrants as FA looks into comments
Sir Jim Ratcliffe made a tepid apology for his claim that England was “colonized” by immigrants and the FA confirmed it would investigate whether the comments had brought the game into disrepute.
The Manchester United co-owner said he was sorry for “offending some people” with his words but insisted it was important to “raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth”.
Sir Jim, one of Britain’s richest men, has faced mounting backlash over the comments and has been under pressure from a number of high-profile politicians, including Sir Keir Starmer, to apologize.
The Prime Minister said the comments were “offensive and wrong”, while Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham said the comments were “wrong, insulting and provocative”.
If the FA finds that Sir Jim’s words brought the game into disrepute, it is likely to receive financial penalties.
This comes after Sir Jim, who founded chemicals giant Ineos in 1998, told Sky News: “You can’t have an economy where nine million people are on benefits and lots of immigrants are coming in. I mean, the UK is being colonised. It’s costing too much money. The UK is being colonized by immigrants.”
In a statement published on Thursday, the billionaire said: “I am sorry that my choice of language has offended and caused concern to some people in the UK and Europe, but it is important to raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration, which supports economic growth.
“My comments were made while answering questions about UK policy at the European Industry Summit in Antwerp, where I discussed the importance of economic growth, employment, skills and manufacturing in the UK.
“My intention was to highlight that governments must manage migration alongside investment in skills, industry and jobs so that long-term prosperity is shared by all. It is critical that we maintain an open debate about the challenges facing the UK.”
The apology was welcomed by the prime minister’s official spokesman, who told reporters: “The Prime Minister has asked for an apology and he has given an apology, and it is absolutely right for Jim Ratcliffe to apologize for that language.”
Asked whether he had gone far enough, the official said: “It is right that he apologises. It is for Mr Ratcliffe to apologise… That is not for me.”
The spokesman confirmed there had been no contact between Downing Street and Sir Jim regarding his comments, adding: “Of course we are of the view that there needs to be a serious debate on immigration, but the prime minister believes in a Britain built for everyone and these comments were inflammatory and divisive.”
Minnie Rahman, chief executive of refugee charity Praxis, said the apology did not go far enough and described it as “half-hearted”. Writing for LBC, she said: “Blaming immigrants for today’s economic problems is a convenient way to evade responsibility for that failure. His half-hearted apology only underscores the point: powerful men are quick to inflame division but slow to accept responsibility for the consequences.”
His Conservative peer and former transport minister Mark Harper said the apology could have been “a little more generous”, describing it as “one of those terrible ‘I’m sorry if I offended anyone’ apologies”.
Mr Burnham, who has previously backed Sir Jim’s plans to renovate Old Trafford and build a new stadium for Manchester United, said the remarks “go against everything Manchester has traditionally stood for”. He added that “footballers coming from all over the world to play in Manchester enhance the life of our city region.”
The mayor later lashed out at United’s ownership, saying: “If any criticism is necessary, it should be directed at those who have contributed little to our life here and have instead spent years draining wealth from one of our proudest institutions.”
Anti-discrimination football campaign group Kick It Out said Sir Jim’s comments were “shameful and deeply divisive”, while also claiming that the UK population had increased by 12 million since 2020 turned out to be false.
Manchester United said it was “proud to be an inclusive and welcoming club” that “integrates equality, diversity and inclusion into everything we do”.
“Our diverse group of players, staff and global fan community reflect the history and heritage of Manchester, a city everyone can call home,” the club said in a statement published on social media. “We will continue to represent our people, our city and our fans with purpose and pride.”
Sir Jim acquired a minority stake in Manchester United in late 2023 and the Ineos group has since taken control of football operations.
The Football Association is understood to be examining whether his comments brought the game into disrepute and breached the rules.
If the FA chooses to formally investigate, the investigation may focus on FA Rule E3.1, which covers general conduct and states: “A participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any way that is improper or brings the game into disrepute, or use any or any combination of violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behavior.”
The FA’s guidance states that “there are no set sanctions for cases of media comments or social network comments”. However, financial penalties are the most usual form of sanction for such cases.” As a co-owner of the club, Sir Jim is subject to FA rules as a participant.
