Several ministers have expressed concerns regarding Shabana Mahmood’s proposed changes to immigration policies and are collaborating with backbenchers to negotiate for more exemptions, according to information obtained by the Guardian.
Keir Starmer is currently engaging in consultations about the suggested amendments, which would complicate the process for individuals seeking settled status in the UK. He faces internal pressure from party members advocating that these changes should not affect those who have already entered the country.
The new proposals would extend the waiting period for indefinite leave to remain from the current five years to ten years. Last month, the Guardian reported that Starmer was exploring the possibility of exempting migrants employed in the public sector and those nearing settled status from these changes.
Nevertheless, there are calls for the Prime Minister to take more substantial actions to alleviate discontent among backbenchers. Prominent Labour figures, including former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, insist that the government should exempt individuals already residing in the UK from the proposed rules.
A prominent backbench dissenting voice suggested that preventing the retrospective application of the changes could mitigate much of the opposition’s anger. However, some, including Emily Thornberry, chair of the foreign affairs select committee, believe a broader array of modifications is essential, particularly regarding the earned settlement aspect of the proposals.
One MP expressed disagreement with the entire framework of changes to indefinite leave to remain but acknowledged that many might accept a compromise on the retrospective application issue.
According to sources from Downing Street, it has always been clear that the proposed changes would undergo a consultation process, including the retrospective aspect, which would require individuals who arrived in the UK within the last five years to wait longer for settlement.
Labour MPs have voiced significant frustration over negative briefings aimed at Tony Vaughan, the MP for Folkestone and Hythe and one of the letter’s coordinators. A recent article in the Sun criticized his background as a human rights and immigration lawyer.
Attorney General Richard Hermer, who has faced similar scrutiny, reportedly reacted with anger to the briefings, which Home Office sources have denied originating from their department. The article featured a quote from an unnamed Labour MP criticizing Vaughan.
Several MPs noted that the Home Office has inadequately addressed their concerns. One MP reported being yelled at after signing the letter, while another mentioned receiving no acknowledgment for a private letter sent to Mahmood over a month ago.
There appears to be a sense of “contempt” for MPs raising concerns, particularly since the changes do not necessitate a parliamentary vote, limiting their ability to oppose them.
London MPs have highlighted that the proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain are a focal point in Green Party campaign materials in London. One leaflet from Islington accused Labour of altering the terms of indefinite leave and “punishing hardworking migrants,” positioning the Greens as advocates for anti-racism and pro-migrant rights.
Mahmood, as Home Secretary, has spearheaded the government’s efforts to adopt a tougher stance on immigration in response to the growing influence of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party. Many Labour MPs are concerned that the Green Party’s success in the recent Gorton and Denton by-election indicates a significant threat to Labour’s left flank.
In reaction to the announcement of the measures, a coalition of 100 Labour MPs signed a letter opposing the changes, asserting that undermining the asylum system by threatening long-term residents is not a way to restore public trust.
Sarah Owen, a prominent figure in the centre-left Tribune group of Labour MPs, likened the potential use of force against children to the tactics employed by Donald Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Rayner echoed similar sentiments during a speech to the Mainstream campaign group last month, criticizing the alterations to settled status. She stated, “We cannot discuss earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts,” emphasizing that such actions compromise fairness and are uncharacteristic of British values.
In response to inquiries about those advocating for changes to the proposals, a Home Office representative stated, “The government’s position remains unchanged. We will always welcome those who come to this country and contribute to our society. However, the privilege of permanent residency should be earned, not automatic.”
They continued, “Between 2021 and 2024, the UK experienced migration levels typically seen over a span of four decades. We must be transparent about the implications of hundreds of thousands of low-skilled migrants obtaining settlement.” The government plans to extend the settlement period from five to ten years and is currently reviewing the 200,000 responses received during the consultation phase before announcing its conclusions.
