Ministers working with Labour backbenchers to temper Mahmood immigration plans | Immigration and asylum
Some ministers concerned about Shabana Mahmood’s immigration changes are working with people working behind the scenes to secure more exemptions, the Guardian has learned.
Keir Starmer is consulting on proposed changes that would make it harder to achieve settled status in the UK and is under pressure from his own party to say the measures should not apply to people who have already entered the UK.
Under the plans, most people will have to wait 10 years to qualify for indefinite leave to remain, rather than the current five-year period. The Guardian announced last month that Starmer was investigating whether the changes would exclude immigrants currently working in the public sector, as well as immigrants who are on the verge of settling down.
But the prime minister is being pressured to go further if he wants to avoid widespread anger in the backbenches. The main demand from Labor opponents of the proposals is that the government should exempt people who have already arrived in the country, as former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner and others have suggested.
One of the leading rebels said they believed stopping the changes from being applied retroactively would be enough to calm the anger of most opponents – but many, including foreign affairs select committee chair Emily Thornberry, said a range of changes were needed, including an earned consensus element of the changes.
“I personally disagree with all the changes to indefinite leave to remain, but I think the majority of the group will accept this compromise,” another MP said.
Downing Street sources said the changes were always subject to consultation and included a retrospective element, meaning people who entered the UK in the last five years would have to wait longer for settlement.
Labor MPs were also particularly angered by briefings against Folkestone and Hythe MP Tony Vaughan, one of the letter’s co-ordinators and the subject of a Sun article criticizing his record as a human rights and immigration lawyer.
Chief prosecutor Richard Hermer, who has been subject to similar attacks, is said to have been angered by the briefing, which Home Office sources denied came from them. The article included a quote from an anonymous Labor MP criticizing Vaughan.
Some said they believed the Home Office was not managing concerns effectively. “If you sign the letter, you will immediately be called and shouted at,” said a member of parliament. Another said that they did not receive a response to the private letter sent to Mahmood. “I wrote it over a month ago and it wasn’t accepted.”
Another MP said there was a degree of “contempt” towards MPs who raised concerns because they could not vote against amendments that did not require a parliamentary vote.
London MPs also noted how much coverage the indefinite leave changes have featured in Greens campaign literature in London. A manifesto in Islington accuses Labor of changing the conditions of indefinite leave to remain and “punishing hard-working immigrants” and says the Greens are “anti-racist and pro-immigrant rights”.
Home Secretary Mahmood has led attempts to toughen the government’s approach to immigration in response to the rise of Nigel Farage’s Reformation UK. But many Labor MPs are concerned that the Green party’s victory in the Gorton and Denton by-elections shows that Labor faces a threat from its left as well as its right.
A group of 100 Labor MPs signed a letter opposing the measures when they were announced, arguing: “You cannot restore public confidence in the asylum system by threatening to forcibly deport refugees who have been living here legally for 15 or 20 years.”
Sarah Owen, leader of the centre-left Tribune group of Labor MPs, compared the threat of force against children to Donald Trump’s use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Rayner repeated many of these criticisms in a speech to campaign group Mainstream last month, during which he criticized changes to settled status. “If we keep moving the goalposts we can’t talk about reaching an agreement,” he said. “Because moving the goalposts undermines our sense of fair play. This is un-English.”
Regarding those seeking changes to the proposals, a Home Office spokesman said: “The government’s position has not changed. We will always welcome those who come to this country and contribute to our national life. But the privilege of living here forever must be earned, not automatic.”
“Between 2021 and 2024, this country experienced levels of immigration it has historically seen in four decades. We must be honest about the scale and impact of hundreds of thousands of low-skilled immigrants reaching settlement.”
“The government will double the path to resolution from 5 to 10 years. As announced in November, we are consulting to apply this change to those who are in the UK today but have not achieved settled status. We are currently reviewing 200,000 responses and will summarize our response in due course.”
